that the president's push to hike taxes will not reduce the deficits. left unchecked, his government spending will bankrupt our future. our plan will protect 740,000 additional small businesses that would otherwise be hit by the tax hike the president is proposing. we do not believe taxes should go up on anybody. but if we can prevent taxes from going up on as many people as possible, on 99.81% of american families and small businesses, we need to do so. americans are looking for jobs. small businesses are deciding whether they should hire or invest in growing. many americans are struggling to make ends meet. we are all committed to creating an economy where everyone has an opportunity to succeed.

similar to one that received 53 democratic votes in the u.s. senate only two years ago and the spending reduction saket serious start toward reducing our deficit and protecting our national security. abs president a balanced offer from the president this is our best option and senate democrats should take up both of these measures immediately. the president has a choice mr. speaker, he can support these measures or be responsible for reckless spending and the largest tax hike in american history. and i yield back. >> thank you mr. speaker, what is unbalance sd the republican package that we see on the floor today. we already talked about the numbers of the republican plan b tax proposal which compared

to going over the fiscal cliff and the senate alternative would actually provide millionaires with a $50,000 tax cut on average while 25 million american families will actually see a tax increase of $1,000 on average, including, mr. speaker, some of our soldiers on the front line in afghanistan today. and majority leader talked about doing the math. do the math on the tax plan because that's exactly what it shows, what the president has called for is a balanced plan that asks for the wealthiest to share the burden of our deficit challenge and make sure that we get our economy in full gear. wand that i yield to mr. levin. >> the gentleman from michigan.

>> i did not know i would follow the distinguished majority leader. i just want to say i mostly want to talk about plan c but for him or anybody else to come on the floor and say the president hasn't proposed spending cuts, it isn't true and it undercuts the necessary level of trust to find common ground. that kind of a statement should not be made. i said in the rules committee for three hours, participated for two last night. there was no reference to plan c. and it came up just a few minutes secretly before midnight. the purpose of plan c is to try to get votes for plan b twn

republican conference. and what it does is to undermine the affordable care act by eliminating the protections and it would result in the loss of health insurance coverage for 420,000 people. it would repeal the block grant, is social services block grant, services for millions of americans and it wasn't machine years ago when chairman camp wrote ssg has been a key source of funding -- of flexible funding for critical social services. so now in a separate effort to find votes for plan b, you turn your back and finally it would harm millions of low income families and their kids.

the estimate is it would affect 1 million families and more than 3 million kids. searching for votes for plan b i think is abomb nabble. >> may i inquire how much time i have? >> you have 17.5 minutes and mr. ryan has 15.5. >> i would yield a minute and a half to mr. ran druse from new jersey. >> mr. speaker the republican majority needs to do what americans do every day in labor negotiations and real estate office was and other places

around this country and that's to negotiate rather tham simply restate their position. the president asked for higher tax rates on income above a quarter of a million dollars and he have compromised and moved it up to $400,000. the president started with a spending cut and moved it up to $1.2 trillion. and he included within that a very controversial proposal dealing with social security increases. the president has compromised. the republicans once again are simply regurg dating their same old position. a tax provision that has a $50,000 cut for millionaires and a tax increase for 25 million working families including service members and their children. a proposal that cuts jobs on transportation projectses, daycare centers, nursing homes

across the country. we should stop wasting our time on one side bills, follow the president's lead, lift our sights higher and negotiate. that is the way out of this and i would urge my friends on the majority side to stop pontificating and start negotiating. i yield back. >> the gentleman from wisconsin. follow the president's lead. i wish he were leading. the gentleman from michigan said he's offered all these specifics. i wish. so where are they? we hear numbers, we see budget and accounting tricks but we don't see specifics. we have yet to see a specific solution. he's claimed he wants to cut spending. we haven't seen a specific

spending cut proposal from the president. that's the problem. with that mr. speaker i'd like to yield three minutes to mr. lewis from oklahoma. >> debate from earlier this evening just before the passage of the bill that the house gaveled out about an hour ago and they met in coverage about 20 minutes ago and that has broken up with the news there will be no vote tonight on speaker boehner's plan b. he says the house did not take up the tax ub measure today because it did not have enough votes to pass. now it's up to the president to work with senator reid to avoid the fiscal cliff. with responsible spending cuts

that will begin to address your nation's crippling debt the house must act now. we understand that the house will go home for christmas and speaker boehner has left the building so there will be no vote tonight on speaker boehner's plan b, the bill that would have tax increases on those making over a million only. we open our phone lines on the results of the republicans failing to move forward on plan b. we'll also take a look at our facebook page, -- not our facebook page, our fiscal cliff page and we'll try to read some

of those tweets. we'll go to minneapolis a democratic call. let's go to michael. >> i'm just calling to say the president of the united states won the election. i know there are a lot of republicans and conservatives who are not necessarily happy with that. but he won, you've got a senate majority democrat, the president is democrat. they've got 1/3 on the republican side. have you to concede the president went up to 400,000 for the tax cuts. -- or for the tax increase. do the republicans in any way consider what any of this will do to the disadvantage to people who are on the margin

paying their mortgage. i don't care if you make 20,000 or 75,000, you're house is fully mortgaged and you're on the edge. the media is playing this as a game and everything and it's talked about what the potential outcome could be. >> again the news the plan b vote on plan b will not happen. the house gaveling out and looks like they are done for the evening. the reporters covering said there will be no vote. one of those report sers russ sell burrman of the hill. after boehner spoke mike kelly of pennsylvania took the microphone and said what are you guys doing? how the hell can you do this to the speaker. >> let's go to indiana on the

republican line. >> the only thing i don't understand about all of this is how can they stand to go home for the holidays with a clear conscience? they are leaving a lot of people hanging and they don't seem to care one way or the other. i don't know, i don't know how they can go home with a clear conscience for the holidays. >> the debt ceiling for 2011 creted the fiscal cliff moment, barber ra tax cuts will go away, tax rates will rise on capital gains and state taxes as well. what's in addition to that too it appears the automatic spending cuts will take place, that's $50 billion from military spending and 50 billion from other spending.

>> my comment is the democrats keep saying that the republicans want to take free lunch away from the children and want to cut this and that. all the republicans are wanting people to do is for people to qualify to get free lunch at school. i work for a gentleman that made over $60,000 a year and his children got free lunch at school. why can't democrats snand that $400,000 is nothing nowadays. there are millions of businesses in this country that have to pay taxes just like it's earned income if you make over -- there's millions of them that make a million dollars. why do you want to raise taxes on those people. that president of ours doesn't understand economics at all. all he wants to do is tax more so we can spend more.

if we can get 3% more in this country getting checks every month, then we can forget this country. >> speaker boehner pulling the plan b vote this evening citing a lacking of member support. >> on our democrats line. caller: yes i'm calling and i just heard the man talking about the taxes and stuff paying -- i worked for 30 something years and paid into this and the majority of people who have paid into this. what about those people that have paid tax and healthcare all their life. and the majority of the money is stonet a war that wasn't even supposed to be and they took all that money and now they still wants to get more money for people on the ground

that's not even necessary and they say they are not even asking for money. >> on the military they did pass the defense thorsization conference report. we understand the senate will not take that up until sometime tomorrow afternoon. unsure as of now what time the senate will be in tomorrow. obviously when they come in you can follow that on c-span2. going to georgia to jim, an independent . there caller: this is jimmy and what i want to talk about there is all these republicans and democrats and all they talk about all this budget and stuff they didn't have anything to do with. the republicans theirself during the bush years and all like that, they run up the deficit there and turned around and handed two wars over to a democratic president and they act like they didn't have nothing to do with it.

they are the ones that is getting all the free stuff. they are getting free insurance, free food, free everything, free travel. when they fly up there, the bonus points they get for flying, i heard one guy from georgia talk like it was a big deal, like he was going to give it to the military families. he didn't give nothing. we paid for all that flying he done and most of the time they ain't dog nothing when he gets there. they act like they are doing something and they aren't doing nothing. they are a bunch of communist as far as i'm concerned. >> eric cantor issued a statement the house has concluded legislative business for the week. they will return after the christmas holiday when needed. democratic caller marcus, go ahead.

caller: i appreciate you taking my call c-span, great program and appreciate you following the political news. i'd like to start out with the political hip-hop that these representatives are going through. it seems to me they just want to stay in the limelight and keep their names out in the public. they want to make the news psych ms. they want to be super stars instead of doing the people's business quietly and professionally. like the congress of the old. you very seldom had these psych wls so much political debate going on in this country. but to the caller earlier that suggested that most small businesses make $1 million a year. that was a great compromise by the president. ask your local flower shop or local drugstore owner or local

buetigs if they make a million dollars a year. they don't make anywhere close. when we talk about small business, you have to talk about small business, local owned businesses. most renters that have property don't make $250,000 a year. >> it sound like you may be a small business owner is that the case? >> i'm an independent contractor so i don't make close to $50,000 ayear. this hoopla about 90% are going to get tax increase. 95 of small business will not be affected by a $400,000 increase for anyone making above that let alone a $250,000 increase. >> we will continue to take

your calls. speaker boehner has called plan b from debate and they have gone home for christmas and they are done for the evening. we are taking calls from viewers. boehner lost control of his caucus and pulled his bill from the docket. this has been the story of speaker boehner since 2011, a man who can't get his own people to follow. some of the views of our viewers. to des moines iowa we go to our independent line. caller: i do have a quick question, my wife and i have been a small business owner for the last two and a half years which we did close our coffee shop in des moines back in january. i've ran for the iowa house twice. i have a quick question, how

can i as an individual and the rest of america, with the help of c-span, find out how each representative or senator feels and votes for this, this plan that the speaker put forth or the plan a as we call it? i think they will come together. but if they don't, how do we know -- how do we, the american people, know who is against this and who is for it? because there are a lot of people in america that really want to know this. >> i give you one resource and the link may be there i see it under web resources, this is our home page but on cspan.org/fiscal cliff. i'm not sure how tchaurnt is. sometimes it takes a day or two

to happen but i bet if you search through there it will be there. on our republican line. caller: i think that the fact that it rorgly was up for debate in the beginning and back and forth between the president and speaker boehner it shows no one wants to take responsibility. he is the president and i don't think preck or ronald reagan would have let us go off the fiscal cliff. i'm sure they don't hold president obama responsible at all for all the investments that were made into renewable energy sources that came out with zero return.

no one holds him responsible for that. no matter what we do with the fiscal cliff, these investments are going to continue on and there will be no return on interest. i think we're going over the cliff and i think the markets have predicted it's not going to be as big as everyone thinks it's going to be. thank you for taking my call. >> a tweet does house melt down mean we go over the cliff one member tells me no but the deal that is being pieced together won't be pretty. host: our republican line. caller: i hope this is an indication they are going to dump boehner. they need to go the way rush limbaugh thinks. they negotiate to fight this

obama if guy. i think it was stolen by massive voter fraud in the swing states. they totally snub ron paul and lost all those potential votes. that's my opinion and i hope we get rid of boehner. host: if it's not boehner, who would be the leader you would look for the speaker of the house? caller: i'd want to here what rush limbaugh or grover nor quist would say about that. host: grover said earlier in the week they did not consider this plan b to allow tax rates to rise for those making a million or more. that the americans for tax reform did not consider that going against the tax pledge. let's go to democratic caller.

go ahead. caller: good evening sir. i'm an american citizen. i'm young. i'm only 24 and i've been watching c-span over the past few months. avend basically i'm going to get into saying something that we as american citizens, yes we have freedom of speech. but we have no right to publicly dishonor the president or the speaker of the house, whether they be democrat or republican, it doesn't matter. you have no right. you give them their respect and that's it. what i also want to say is for the speaker of the house boehner, no, i am a democrat but i respect him. because when i see him on tv,

he's a man of great stat chure and seems like a noble person. he's somebody that knows something. >> speaker boehner pulling his plan b saying the house did not take up the tax measure today because it did not have sufficient support to pass. the house is out until after christmas. the senate is in tomorrow. they have to finish up a bit of work for the defense authorization bill. let's go to our republican line. caller: thank you for taking my call. admit moving his threshold to 400,000 showed willing to

compromise. take the tax increase. take the taxes off the table. basically his proposals are a drop in the bucket of what it is going to do to the deficit ceiling here. basically take it off the table. say okay, fine, we will accept the tax increases and you basically hold them to some sort of accountable. say in two years here are the goals have you to reach f. not go back to our plan which is the entitlements have to be cut significantly. >> the $400,000 level is still on the table in terms of the conversation between the speaker's office and the white house. yet the other side of that is the republicans today made a specific point that they are saying that the president's offer did not include any

substa tive budge cuts. what do you say to that? >> he wants to increase the unemployment another year and add in a billion stimulus. but they keep harping on the taxes. fine. let us eliminate the tax part of the question so there is no more arguing about it and then we'll see what our deficit is and what is there throast argue about. host: i asked that caller earlier who if it's not john boehner who is the best party to lead the house? caller: i have confidence in boehner. host: still, after tonight? caller: boehner has got a really tough choice with his tea party members to get them to budge. and you can tell that he's passionate about this country and putting us on the right

path. i don't think to get to that point of thinking who is next, i still have confidence in his leadership. host: let's here from today on our democrats line. caller: i'm watching the debate and the conversation that was going on earlier. the republican party which claims itself as the family values party is quite willing to allow millions of people to roll off of their own financial cliff just so that we can maintain, not just a lower tax rate for people who are making a great deal of money, let's call it what $400,000 is, a great deal of money. and those in the defense and energy sectors and the

insurance sectors that are really the problem in terms of spending, we are giving money to companies in terms of tax breaks n terms of writeoffs, kicking their own tax burden down the road, kicking the can down the road, knowing that is the problem, the republican party still somehow maintain they are the party of family values. it's ludicrous at this point. every democrat on the planet and everything who is not a republican know spending has to be cut. but we also know the problem is the handoffs being given to companies that pull the strings in our government in terms of lobbyist. host: thank you so much. we are looking live at the u.s. capitol. the light is still on but the house is done until after christmas.

speaker boehner not having support to bring forward his plan b. he said the house did not take up the tax measure because it did not have sufficient support from our members. now it's up to the president to work with senator reid to avert the fiscal cliff the senate must act now. we continue to take your calls in reaction to what you saw in the house and the fissral cliff. next up our independent line. caller: thank you for taking my call. the speaker of the house really was not fair. i believe that the man is not rational. he says he will do for the people to fut people back to work. i don't believe that. actually he works for us. we elected congress and those senators up there to do our

job. and every time there is a problem with the economic, they pick on the social security. these are hard earned money from our sweat that we put in social security for retirement. and every time they want to pick at it and say -- how much we supposed to get at what age and what amount of money you got in the bank. this -- discussion over the tax increases from the white house was a $400,000 level. and speaker boehner's plan b did not come to the floor for a

vote today. >> confronted with a revolt house republicans put off a vote tonight on legislation for tax rises on people making a million dollars a year and up. emerging from a hur ridley called house of republicans, ohio republican said speaker boehner had told law makers he's going to call the president and he's going to go down and talk to him and maybe they can hammer something out. that from the associated press. deborah on our democrats line. welcome. caller: thank you for taking my call. i've never called before but i felt compeled to really say something. host: thank you for calling in. caller: i am a white democrat and i support obama 100%.

but i find myself as i was watching this and throughout the last few weeks feeling sorry for boehner because i feel he's caught between a hard rock. he just doesn't know what 20 do. and i have my own theory and a lot of people have a theory that's never stressed on the news. but i believe this congress will do anything to impede this president. i think this has been the most disrespected talking about a cliff, thrown over a cliff president that i've witnessed in my time and i'm 54-year-old which and i think it's sad that our congress people will let our country suffer and go through more pain than we already do just to show that we're not going to let an

african-american president dictate what happens in the united states. i hope somebody will disarm us and say this is what is happening and that's what i really believe. host: an entirely different view from deborah's is clifton brown's who tweets has anyone considered the possibility that obama is making these fiscal cliff offers knowing they won't pass but they will divide the g.o.p. a republican call ner texas. caller: as a conservative republican that's against tax increases in any way, i'm frustrated tonight with the republican caucus that they did not take boehner's plan and even bring it to a vote. i know the political ideology of these hard line con serves tives and i believe in it.

but in order to take steps to accomplish that, they have to take a practical approach to getting the steps necessary to get there. and so i think that the situation in which political ideology took a step over what practically could make stup happen for the republican party. and i think if the republican party could see that, that if the fiscal cliff occurs and we go over the cliff by not passing boehner's plan tonight then taxes will go up on every american. and since we can't get plan b done, then the republican party isn't going to have any sprenth in their hand. i think we will see the tax increases on $250,000 or more. host: we will take a couple more calls.

kinald of a historical view. folks we've seen a melt down against these same g.o.p. leaders before. doesn't anybody remember tarp 1? host: let's go to our republican line. caller: first of all i want to separate the republicans from the tea party. i am a republican but the tea party is a whole other neart themselves. i don't know why they call themselves republicans. that's who is holding up this process. i think speaker boehner is doing a wonderful job. when he talked yesterday about the fiscal cliff it was trying to stop him and boehner had a uphill bat because he was dealing with the tea party. those are who are giving the problems and they need to 2014

these people need to come out of office so the republican party can get back to their values and doing the thins they need to do. but the tea party is stopping this african-american president period. host: you can continue the conversation online and tomorrow on washington journal. we'll be talking about this 7:00 a.m. eastern. you can send us your tweets and check out what others have to say at cspan.org/fiscal cliff. the news of the evening the house is out until past christmas and that's because they pulled the plan b fiscal cliff bill and speaker boehner saying he did not have the support to pass that bill. up next we will bring you some of the floor debate on the bill that did pass, the bill that did pass and replaces the spending cuts from other

agencies. >> and by every small business owner looking to expand and hire. we have passed bills and put forward reforms that would save programs like social security, medicare and medicaid from certain and predictable failure. yet we cannot find cooperation mr. speaker from the white house or the other side of the aisle to help solve these problems. it is unfornl that we find ourselves in this place just 11 days from the new year. for months we have been ready and willing to work with the president to prevent the fiscal cliff from impacting small businesses and hardworking families. the math shows that the president's push to race taxes won't reduce the deficit and left unchecked his government spending will bankrupt our

future. our plan will protect 740,000 additional small businesses that would otherwise be hit by the tax hike the president is proposing. we don't believe taxes should go up on anybody but if we can prevent them going up on 99.81% of families and small businesses, we must and need to do so. americans are looking for jobs and small businesses are trying to decide if they need to hire and invest in growings and many americans are struggling to make ends meet. we are all struggling to create an economy where everyone can succeed. house republicans are offering a plan today, similar to one that received 53 democratic votes in the u.s. senate two years ago and the spending

reduction act is a serious start to reducing our deficit and protecting our national security. absent a balanced offer from the president, this is our nation's best option and senate democrats should take up both of these measures immediately. the president has a choice, mr. speaker, he can support these measures or be responsible for reckless spending and the largest tax hike in american history. and i yield back. >> we talked about the numbers of the plan b tax proposal which compared to going over the fiscal cliff and the senate alternative would actually provide millionaires with a

$50,000 tax cut on average while 25 million american families will actually see a tax increase of $1,000 on average, including mr. speaker, some of our soldiers on the front line in afghanistan today. and the majority leader talked about doing the math. do the math on the tax plan because that's exactly what it shows. what the president has called for is a balanced plan that asked for the wealthiest to share the burden of our deficit challenge and make sure we get our economy in full gear which and with that i yield a minute and a half to mr. levin. >> the gentleman from michigan.

>> i did not know i would follow the distinguished majority leader. but for him to come on the floor and say the president hasn't proposed spending cuts, it isn't true and it undercuts the necessary level of trust to find common ground. that kind of a statement should not be made. i saturday in the rules committee and participated for two last night. there was no reference to plan c and it came up just a few minutes secretly before midnight. the purpose of plan c is to try to get votes for plan b twn republican congress. and what it does is to undermine the affordable care act by eliminated the

protections and the joint task committee says it would result in the loss of health insurance coverage for 420,000 people. it would repeal the block grant, is social services block grant services for millions of americans. and it wasn't many years ago when chairman camp wrote ssbg has been a key source of funding of flexible funding for critical social services. sooned now in a desperate effort to find votes for plan b, you turn your back on that. and finally it would harm millions of low income families and their kids. the estimate is it would affect one million families and more than three million kids. searching for votes for plan b with that kind of an approach,

i think, is abomb nabble. i yield back. >> the gentleman from wisconsin. >> gentleman reserves. gentleman from maryland. >> can i inquire how much time i have? >> you have 17.5 and mr. ryan has 19.5. i'm sorry 15.5. >> i will yield a minute and a half to the gentleman from new jersey. >> without objection. >> mr. speaker, the republican majority needs to do what americans do every day in labor negotiations and real estate offices and other places around this country and that's to negotiate rather than simply restate their position. the president asked for higher tax rates on income above a

quarter of a million dollars and he compromised and moved it up to $400,000. the president starting way spending cut number at 5 or 6 billion and moved it up to $1. trillion. the president has compromised. the republicans are regurji dating their same old position. a tax cut for millionaires and a tax increase for 25 million working families including service members and their children. a proposal that cuts jobs on transportation projects, daycare centers, nursing homes across the country. we should stop wasting our time on one sided bills, follow the president's lead, lift our

sights higher and negotiate. that is the way out of this and i would urge my friends on the majority side to stop upon fiff indicating and start negotiating. i yield back. >> the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from wisconsin. >> follow the president's lead, i wish he were leading. the gentleman from michigan said he's offered all these specifics. i wish it were. so where are they? we hear numbers, we see budget gimmicks and accounting trix but we don't see specifics. we have yet to see a specific solution from this president to deal with this debt crisis. he's claimed he wants to cut $3 for spend of every $1 tax increase. we haven't seen a specific spending cut proposal from the president. that's the problem. with that i'd like to yield

minutes to the gentleman from oklahoma mr. luke cuss. >> thank you mr. speaker. i rise in support of this legislation. it's no secret we are facing a severe debt crisis right now. with the $16 trillion mark in debt piled up and if we don't act quickly we will be passing a crushing burden along to our children and grandchildren. reducing government spending is never an easy task. we face difficult choices but house republicans have lived up to our responsibilities to find ways to cut our cost so we can live within our means. the agriculture committee found $33 billion over ten years in savings. we did this in snap. these provisions reduce waste

and close program loopholes. i'd like to make it absolutely clear that none of these recommendations will prevent families that qualify for assistance under snap from receiving those benefits. think about that. all they have to do is demonstrate their income level, demonstrate their asset level, qualify and they will receive their benefits. we are working hard to better target the program and improve its integrity so families in need can continue to receive nutrition assistance. every one of these provisions represents common sense and good government in times of fiscal restraint. i'd also like to note policy are not the only changes that the house agriculture committee has passed that would cause deficit reduction. we passed a farm bill by a

strong vote majority of republicans and majority of democrats. the bill makes reforms commodity programs as well significant reforms to the food stamp program. my committee is doing everything it can to provide a variety of options for all parties to consider. we've made workable reforms to all programs within our jurisdiction saving taxpayers billions of dollars. we want to be a part of solution. we've proven time and again we are willing to do our part. again, i urge my colleagues adopt these reforms. yes it means you'll have to apply. yes it means you'll have to demonstrate your assets and your income. but if you're qualified, you will receive the help you need. you just have to demonstrate you need the help. is 245 unreasonable?

with a $16 trillion deficit? is that unreasonable with a trillion dollar spending deficit. demonstrate we need the help -- you need the help and we'll help you. >> i yield back the balance of my time fments >> first the chairman of the budget committee hasn't put any specific spending cuts on the table. that's not true. his proposal has been available to the public for well over a year now, one specific proposal. the president said we should get rid of subsidies $30 billion than item alone. >> would the gentleman yield? >> not now. >> i meant net. >> that is not true and we'll have a longer discussion but

the reality is act subsidies is one example. this bill our republican colleagues have brought to the floor again, while it cuts deeply into food and nutrition programs, it doesn't take one penny for ago businesses from subsidies. with respect to the food program, i think the chairman knows that the snap statute provides in statute two routes for people to be eligible for food and nutrition assistance. one is the specific in common asset test or they can become eligible under the snap statute based on participation in other programs where they have to show income based needs. mr. speaker nobody wants fraud. we should find every dollar of wasted money and get rid of it but don't pretend that people ubbed the statute qualify they

are engaged in fraud and what you are proposing to do in this republican bill is to deny millions of people their legal sport for folks on nutrition programs and we do not think we should be doing that at the same time we are giving millionaires a $50,000 tax cut. with that i yield to mr. pallone from new jersey. >> thank you mr. speaker and my colleague from maryland. >> republicans are trying to undermine the middle kass. they omented for cuts to the people who can afford them the least in an effort to protect the wealthy. the republican plan may as well be called the reversed robin hood plan. it takes food out of the mouths of children by cutting their

nutrition assistance programs snap, next they move on to trying to repeal the affordable care act which makes healthcare for affordable for women, seniors and the poor. 3 million will lose access to healthcare. women will lose access to critical health service fs covered like cancer screenings and imization and the last step is to go after a favorite g.o.p. target and that's social security. house republicans want to protect the wealthiest americans. it couldn't be more obvious. i yield back the balance of my time. >> the gentleman from wisconsin. >> i'd like to jeeled today gentleman from michigan. >> thank you mr. speaker, today we take a stand for future generations as we work to get our $16 trillion national debt

under control and put us on a sound path to a sound future. we identified key areas to e deuce spending and replace the blunt instrument known as the sequester. without this thoughtful balanced package of savings in two weeks the sequestration is going to cut spending indiscriminantly. critical priorities such as important cancer research and inspection budgets to keep safe are on the chopping block they threat on the derail the solvency of the u.s. i'm proud of our committee that identified over $100 billion in savings over the next decade.

we say enough is enough of slush funds in obama care. those are blank checks goiven hss that are going to cost taxpayers billions of dollars. we made changes to medicare that are going to put it on firmer ground. if this federal mandate impedes states's abilities to and week tns safety net by making it more difficult for states to target resources to the most vulnerable americans which we achieved significant savings as well in something that was absent in the president's healthcare law being tort reform. the president declared in his state of the union message said i'm willing to look at other ideas to bring down cost including one that will republicans suggested, medical

malpractice reform. now is the time for the president to fulfill that pledge and put doctors, patients and taxpayers first. that's in this bill. the house passed a budget. and now legislation again that truly cuts spending to offset the automatic spending cuts or sequester. our debt grows by $4 billion a day and it's our kids who and their grandkids who are going to pay the price if we stand by and do nothing. without action a $20 trillion debt could soon be a reality. so if not us, who is going to do it? if not now, when sit going to happen? it's time to make the sufficient choices to get the deficit down. let's vote for this bill. i yield my time. >> the gentleman from maryland. >> i now yield a minute and a

half to the gentleman lady from california. >> thank you very much. well, it is clear that the republican image tiss hr 6684 is an attempt to generate votes for speaker boehner's plan b. when it comes to protecting the middle class this gets a failing grade grade. first it repeels the authority that was created in dodd-frank wall street reform act of too big to fail institutions. it would also tie the hands of the consumer financial protection bureau, an agency we formed under dodd-frank to make sure financial institutions play by the rules whit comes to mortgage, student loans credit card and payday lenders. it would eliminate that

independent funding and tie their hands by making their bureau basically have to go through the prorpeyations process. the plan like wise eliminates the office of financial research, an agency that's tasked with collecting information on our financial markets and financial stability issues. finally it would just kill the home affordable modification program. we need to improve our ability to do loan modifications, not kill it. it is unnoornt at the end of another session of congress, the republicans are plague with the u.s. economy when they should be working in a bipartisan man tore avert the fiscal cliff. ladies and gentlemen, i know that many of you did not know that all of this was in this bill. but we have this plan, this orally way of dissolving these financial institutions when

they put our economy at risk so vote no on this. >> gentleman reserves. gentleman from maryland. >> may i inquire how much time remains? >> gentleman from maryland has 11.5 and the gentleman from wisconsin has 9. >> mr. speaker, i will just say a few words again about approximate priorities reflected in this republican package. if you look at plan b, the tax part, you are giving people who earn over $1 million a year on average a $50,000 tax cut compared to what it would be under the senate proposal. and at the same time under this proposal that we are talking about here on the floor of the house, you are talking about eliminating important support in food and nutrition programs for millions of americans

including 300,000 kids who would no longer be on school lunch programs. what this boils down to once again, mr. speaker, is a question of priorities. we've got to reduce our deficit ooned get our economy moving again. but we have to deal with it in a balanced way. not in a way that provides additional tax breaks to the wealthiest in the country. i yield the balance of my time. >> i'll >> these kinds of reforms would have grown by over 260%. what we are saying with these

programs is you need to be eligible for the actual benefits to receive the benefits. that is not asking too much. if we cannot put a common-sense reforms like this in place, we will never get anywhere in dealing with this debt crisis. the gentle lady from the financial services committee says it is wrong to submit the consumer financial protection agency to the process. i find that an amazing critique. this agency gets its money through the federal reserve without ever going through congress. all of theseorget agencies should have to go through the process. that is not getting a program. that is bringing accountability to the program. i yield three minutes to the

gentleman from georgia. >> i rise in support of the underlying bill, h.r. 6684, the spending reduction act of 2012. 5 -- title 4 of the bill. which was just referenced. >> we will take you live to the house floor. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the joint resolution. the clerk: senate joint resolution 49, providing for the appointment of barbara barrett as a citizen regent of the board of regents of the smithsonian institution? the speaker pro tempore: is there objection to the consideration of the joint

resolution? without objection, the joint resolution is read a third time and passed and the motion to reconsider is laid on the table. >> mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent that when the house adjourn today it adjourn to meet at 2:00 p.m. tomorrow. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. the chair lays before the house a communication. the clerk: the honorable the speaker, house of representatives, sir, pursuant to the permission granted in clause 8 of rule 2 of the rules of the u.s. house of representatives, the clerk received the following message if the secretary of the senated on december 20, 2012, at 7:44 p.m., that the senate agreed to without amendment house joint resolution 122, signed, sincerely, karen l. haas. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to clause of rule 20, proceedings will resume on motions to suspend the rules on motions previously postponed. the question is on suspending the rules and passing h r.

1509. che clerk will report the title. the clerk: a bill to prohibit the inclusion of social security account numbers on medicare cards. the speaker pro tempore: the question is, will the house suspend the rules an pass the bill? the question is will the house suspend the rules and pass the bill as amended? so many as are in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, 2/3s be in the affirmative, the rules are suspended, the bill is pass and without objection the motion to reconsider is laid on the table. the question is on the motion of passing h r. 3378. which the clerk will report by title. the clerk: h.r. 4378, a bill to designate the post office at n ewington, michigan as the elizabeth l. kinuron post office building. the speaker pro tempore: in the opinion of the chair, 2/3 being in the affirmive, the bill is

passed and without objection the motion to reconsider is laid on the table. the question is on suspending the rules and passing h.r. 3869 which the clerk will report by title. the clerk: h.r. 3869, a bill to designate the post office in little rock, arkansas as the sydney "sid" mcmasters post office building. the speaker pro tempore: those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. 2/3 being in the affirmative, the bill is passed and without objection the motion to reconsider is laid on the table. the question is on suspending the rules and passing this ebill h.r. 4389. the clerk: h.r. 4389, a bill to designate the postal service in fowler, california, as the cecil e. bolt post office. the speaker pro tempore: the question is will the house suspend the rules and pass the bill? those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair 2/3 being in the affirmative the rules are suspended this ebill is passed and without objection

though the motion to reconsider is laid on the table. the unfinished business is the question on suspending the rules and passing h.r. 6260. the clerk: h.r. 6260, a bill to designate the post office as the kenneth m. ballard memorial post office. the speaker pro tempore: the question is will the house suspend the rules and pass the bill? those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair 2/3 being in the affirmative the rules are suspended, the bill is pass and without objection the motion to reconsider is laid on the table. the unfinished business is the question on suspending the rules and passing h r. 6379 which the clerk will report by title. the clerk: h.r. 6379 a bill to designate the facility of the united states postal service at 6239 savannah highway at the occurties bennett post office. the speaker pro tempore: the question is will the house suspend the rules and pass the

bill? those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, 2/3 being in the affirmative, the rules are suspended this bill is passed and without objection the motion to reconsider is on the table. the clerk: h.r. 6587 a bill to designate the facility of the united states postal service located at 225 simi village drive in california as the terry osberry post office. the speaker pro tempore: the question is will the house suspend the rules and pass the bill as amended? those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair 2/3 being in the affirmative, the rules are suspended, the bill is passed and without objection the motion to reconsider is laid on the table. the chair lays before the house the following personal requests. the clerk: leaves of absence requested for mr. culberson of texas for today and mr. rivera of florida for today and the balance of the week.

the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the request is granted. under the speaker's announced spoil of january 5, 2011, the gentleman from arizona, mr. flake, is recognized for 60 minutes as the designee of the majority leader. mr. flake: mr. speaker, i have been putting off these remarks for a few weeks now. the truth is i have been reluctant to deliver my final speech on the house floor. this has been my home away from home for the past dozen years. and it's tough to say good-bye to friends and colleagues. but -- when i'm asked what i enjoy most about this place, i respond without hesitation, it's the give and take on the house floor. to be sure, much of what is said here is scripted. with members of both parties playing their designated role. too often talking points serve as literary guardrails but ever so often genuine debate breaks

out. spontaneous points are made. members are persuaded and minds are change thsmed frequently happens late at night when members are less concerned about whether folks are watching at home. i wish more people would tune in during such nonscripted discussions. it represents congress at its best. my first six years were spent in the majority, followed by four years in the minority and then two years again in the majority. having experienced both i can tell you i prefer the majority. but either party holding the reins of power should recognize that their grasp is tenuous. and that's a good thing. both parties benefit by taking turns in the wilderness every now and then. over the past 10 years i have offered hundreds of amendments, privileged resolutions and points of order in this chamber. in fact, the vast majority of

these offerings resulted in far more red marks next to members' names than green marks up on the wall above me. but i like to think that we, over time, made a difference and that this institution is better for it. in addition to my own capable staff, both here and in arizona, i want to thank those who staffed this chamber. from the floor staff who answered the leadership on both sides of the aisle, to the clerks, to the stenographers, to the parliamentarians who keep us operating within the rules, to the cloakroom staff who keep us fed and remind us when to vote. i found that there resides in all of these individuals an abiding love and deep respect for this institution. most of all i want to thank my family, my wife, sheryl, ryan, alexis, austin, tanner, and

dallen. they have been supportive, patient and long suffering in dealing with a schedule that is anything but family friendly. thank you. finally, i want to thank the good people of arizona who perhaps against their better judgment have sent me here six times to represent them. i will be forever grateful. so now i head through the rotunda and into the other chamber, the senate, better known to this body as enemy territory. i've used that phrase many times myself, for which i will have to now repent but at least my penance will be practiced during a six-year term. a few years ago, the -- a few weeks ago, the 12 newly elected senate freshmen were invited to the national archives. before our meal we were taken to the legislative vault where we viewed the original signed copy of the first bill enacted by congress as well as other landmark pieces of legislation and memorabilia.

oaths of allegiance, signed by revolutionary war soldiers, witnessed by general washington. documents and artifacts related to the civil war, segregation and women's suffrage were also on hand. it was an affirmation of the tumultuous seas through which our ship of state has sailed for more than 200 years. we have had many brilliant and inspired individuals at the helm, trimming sails along the way. we have also had personalities, ranging from immediate oklahomaer to malevolent but our system of government has survived them all. serious challenges alie -- lie ahead, particularly on the fiscal side but any honest reckoning of our history and our pross pecks will note that we've confronted and survived more daunting challenges than we now face. it's a durable, resilient system of government that we have here. designed to withstand the

foibles of man, including yours truly. may god continue to bless the united states of america and may he be ever mindful of this great and honorable institution, the house of representatives, the people's house. mr. speaker, for the last time, i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. under the speaker's announced spoil of january 5, 2011, the gentleman from indiana, mr. pence, is recognized for the balance of the hour. mr. pence: thank you, mr. speaker. i ask unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. pence: mr. speaker, it is

-- it's an honor to rise for what will be my last time speaking as a member of the united states house of representatives. the people of indiana have given me a new assignment. but i rise tonight to pay a debt of gratitude. to all those who gave me the privilege to serve in this place. as a boy, i dreamed of someday representing my hometown in our nation's capitol. and 12 years ago, the people of the sixth congressional district made that dream a reality. and so i begin tonight by simply saying thank you to all of them for letting me live that dream in these past 12

years, to come to this place again and again and to be some small part of the story of this institution. and america's story. my only ambition in congress has been to look after my family and keep my word to the people who sent me here, to let my yes be yes and my no be no. and it is my hope that as people review the totality of my record and my life, they'll see that we have done just that. but there are those to thank tonight that made that possible and that's what brings me to this task this evening. first, permit me to give thanks to god, whose grace and mercy

has sustained us every day that we have served the people of indiana in this place. next and on this earth most of all, i rise to honor and thank my beloved wife, karen pence, whose love, whose support, whose sacrifice, patience and kindness have made all that i have done in the service of the people of indiana in this place possible. thanks for believing in me. i love you and i'll see you home. to our children, michael,

charlotte and awedry -- audrey. they were six, seven and eight when i first came here 12 years ago. they are now 18, 19 and 21. thank you for your love, but thank you for the sacrifices that you made that we can live our dreams. now go make your dreams come true. i know every one of you can. to my colleagues with whom i have stood in this place, shoulder to shoulder, doing freedom's work, standing each

and every day cheerfully on behalf of the founding principles of this nation, standing for a strong national defense, limited government, for economic freedom and for the moral foundations of this nation. you know who you are. and we will take you from this place in our hearts always. you know there is a saying back home that when you see a turtle on a fence post, one thing you know for sure, he didn't get there on his own. lastly, what i want to do tonight, mr. speaker, is really pay a debt of gratitude to the best congressional staff in american history. the men and women who have

served our efforts in this city and at home in indiana for the past 12 years. i leave this body truly humbled. when i look back at the caliber of the staff that we have been able to call to this mission. servant leaders all. they are men and women who approach each and every day with a servant's heart, made sacrifices over the years in order to serve the people of indiana with integrity and energy. names like bill smith and lonnie zanarky. josh pickcok, paul teller, mark short, brian neal, just to name

a few. you know, i don't have time tonight to name all the men and women who served us in various capacities over these last 12 years, but i would ask unanimous consent to submit each and every one of their names to the congressional record this night. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. mr. pence: before i yield the floor for the last time, let me close simply by speaking a word of confidence and one more word of gratitude. some people look on in washington, d.c., and they are rightly frustrated. some people can't come to this nation's capital -- some people

can come to this nation's capital and lose their idealism. i'm not that person. when i walk out for the last time, i will leave here with my idealism intact. i will continue to believe that we are one nation under god, rich with a purpose yet to be fulfilled. that no matter how dark the day may seem that we can be confident when we stand for freedom and we do freedom's work . because freedom is not just our story, it's his story. and when we stand for freedom, however imper effectly, we make his work on this earth our own.

in the words of a poet i depart this place saying the words, it is lovely, dark and deep, but i have promises to keep and miles to go before i sleep, miles to go before i sleep. i say to my colleagues and friends and neighbors in indiana , my duties take me elsewhere, but wherever providence leads this nation, let us remember that we have promises to keep for future generations of americans in preserving, protecting and defending the blessings of liberty for ourselves and our pros tert, and i know we'll keep that promise because we're americans. thank you for the honor of

addressing you tonight and to the people of the 6th congressional district, know that i will always be grateful for the privilege you have given me to serve in this place and i will always cherish my days in the people's house. may god bless the united states house of representatives and all who serve her now and ever serve on this floor and may god bless the united states of america. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. under the speaker's announced policy of january 5, 2011, the gentlewoman from tennessee, mrs.

blackburn is recognized. mrs. blackburn: i'm delighted to stand and to say thank you to mr. flake, senator flake, it will be, and to mr. pence, who will be governor pence. we are delighted that they have served here and i will have to say that they have been happy warriors as we have many times stood on this floor and have fought against earmarks, have fought against increased spending and i dare say, mr. speaker, as mr. flake crosses across the rotunda and into the other chamber, i don't think the senate will ever go back to earmarks because i know someone who can filibuster an earmark with the best of them. and that talent is coming to that other chamber. and indeed, the happy warrior

who will be the governor of indiana, my concern there, quite frankly, mr. speaker, is i know some of the reforms that he has in mind for that great state. and i don't want them to become too competitive with my home state of tennessee. and i'm going to be keeping a very close eye on the good work that he is doing there for the people of indiana and look forward to what he is going to do. you know, it is so very true and we talk about it a lot, but i think we appreciate it here in this chamber, our states are the laboratory of democracy in this nation. that is where great ideas come from. they bubble up and they get tested and we know that indiana is going to have quite a few new ideas that they will be trying. so we are looking forward to what he will do there. i want to yield at this time to

the gentleman from texas, mr. hensarling, who has worked so closely with these two gentlemen as we have fought expanded government, fought higher taxes, fought uncontrollable and out-of-control spending and i yield to the gentleman for his comments this evening. mr. hensarling: i thank the gentlelady for yielding to me. mr. speaker, an hour ago, i had no idea that i would be on the house floor to witness the farewell speeches of two giants who have served in this institution. and in many ways, mr. speaker, i approach my comments tonight with trepidation because my voice is most inadequate and unprepared for this moment. the term happy warrior was used -- the gentleman from arizona,

mr. flake, i have never known that gentleman not to have a smile on his face. mr. speaker, if there was one individual who summed up the phrase that one man in the right makes the majority, it's the gentleman from arizona, jeff flake. and mr. speaker, i have no doubt whatsoever that the other body will never be the same. when the gentleman from arizona steps in to that other chamber. and because of his leadership, many come here and serve, they speak with eloquence, they represent their values, they represent their constituents, but, mr. speaker, not all that many leave this institution and

can look themselves in the mirror and know they have made a difference. the gentleman from arizona has made a difference in the people's house than have the people's money been spent. mr. speaker, it's a challenging time in our nation's history. there's much turmoil. i know many may question madison's mad genius in providing for this thing called divided government. it's sloppy, it's messy, it gets a little noisy. it's not always efficient, but it has produced the greatest, freest, most prosperous republic in the history of mankind and

that divided government is played out in this institution by nobel men and women -- noble men and women. i find my voice most inadequate to honor the work of these two great men. i look at the words above you, mr. speaker, in god we trust. few have lived that and had it on their heart than the gentleman from indiana, mike pence. he knows the words of jefferson that can the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we have removed their only firm foundation and that is a conviction in the hearts of men

that these liberties are gifts of god. i know this man, this great man from the heartland. i know karen, michael, charlotte and audrey. what a strong family. and i want to thank them for their sacrifice. we, mr. speaker, as you know, we serve our country, but we don't sacrifice, but our families do. and what a great sacrifice of the pence family of indiana to let this great man come and serve with distinction for these years. . mike pence has brought the heartland to this institution and taught us all well. he's led by example and tone something that frankly few members have done and that is

he has inspired us. to greatness. again, mr. speaker, many serve here as public servants, but some go beyond being a public servant and they embody everything that was good and great about the founders, and we have a special word for those people. it's called patriot. mike pence, the gentleman from indiana, is a patriot. his moral compass always points true north. his humor and compassion have lifted his colleagues in this chamber in tough and challenging moments. he embodies that definition of character that he always does what is right, even when no one

is watching. and because he understands better than most what the true genius of america is, every day, he gets up, he praises his lord, he thanks him for his family and he dreams bold dreams because, mr. speaker, he is an american. mr. speaker, i've been granted many blessings in life. many blessings in life. few that i will cherish as much as the blessing of fighting for freedom on the floor of the united states house of representatives. at the side of mike pence. he's taught me that verse in proverbs that iron sharpens iron, mr. speaker. he has always sharpened my iron. he's taught me about proverbs

18:24, and there is a friend that stick eth closer than a brother. mike pence is my friend that sticketh closer than a brother. i've always thought, what is the highest praise i can pay to such a friend? back in dallas, texas, i've got a son, travels. he's 9. since it's a school night, he hopefully is not playing angry birds or plants vs. zombies or some other electronic game. he and his sister are the apple of my eye and my wife's eye. and i thought, mr. speaker, what kind of life might my son

have, how do i want to raise my son? what do i want to teach him? who do i want him to emulate? and mr. speaker, i've said this about very few people i have met in life but mr. speaker, i could never be more proud than if my son, travels jeb hensarling, grew up to be like mike pence, the governor-elect of indiana. my friend. our patriot. i yield back the balance of my time. mrs. blackburn: i thank the gentleman for his kind remarks and we all share expressing how much we've enjoyed having these gentlemen with us and we also want to recognize someone, i want to yield to the gentleman

from florida who has been with us for all too short a period of time, mr. west is here for his last day on this floor and i know that each of us join in saying thank you to him. he came to this floor and mr. speaker, he has -- he does not back down from the fight. i think he runs toward that fight. when it is a fight for freedom. when it is a fight for getting this government under control. and returning us to our constitutional principles. because he is a constitutional conservative. and as we have this week stood on this floor and have discussioned the issues that are in front of us, the issues that the media has termed the fiscal cliff, that this day was coming.

the republicans in the house have been working on this issue for months, we sent bills starting in may over to the senate. they've been sitting on harry reid's desk, some of them, we finished the last one it went over september 19 and they have chosen not to take up those bills but it's porn to note that in that lesson of looking at what the senate chose not to do, and what the leader of the senate chose not to do, we have people in the house that chose to take an action that would prohibit higher taxes on all americans. it would prohibit the sequestration from taking place on our military. and it would enable us to move toward a pathway of fiscal responsibility and economic growth and renaissance in this nation. so at this time, i yield to the gentleman from florida, mr. west.

mr. west: i want to thank the gentlewoman from tennessee for allowing me to participate this evening. thank you for allowing me to have this time. but i want to also pay homage to two great men that are going to be departing this house of representatives. i think back to five years ago in december of 2007. i had just gotten back from two and a half years of serving in afghanistan and i had decided i was going to throw my hat into the ring to run for congress in 2008. and i -- and i understood what it meant to be a constitutional conservative. i understood what it meant when you talked about limited government, when you talked about fiscal responsibility, individual sovereignty, when you talked about a free marketplace of ideas where the american people can prosper and also a strong national defense. but of course the critical thing was i could go back and read locke and montes cue, i could read -- and montesquie, i could read hob bembings s and

our founding fathers, i wanted to have individuals i could look at as individuals, and i said, who can i model myself after? i can tell you the two men leaving this house of representatives, one going to the senate and one going to be the governor of his state, i heard about mr. flake of arizona, i had -- who was mr. earmark. i had to understand what does an earmark mean. i've come to understand what it means and how horrible it is when you look at what's happened with our debt, our deficit and fiscal responsibility. came to understand what it meant to have principles and pragmatism and having the courage to stand upon your convictions and continue to bush and continue to try to make a difference even if it seems you may stand alone because that's one of the mottos from a great unit in the

101st airborne division, we know that from "the band of brothers," what that means, stands alone. if there's one person that's always stood alone and will continue to do so for the principles that are right, fiscal responsible principles that are right, it's senator-elect jeff flake. being able to study him and see him, not so much worried about having a bunch of conversation bus learning by example. helped me to have two great years here in the people's house. the people's house where for 22 years in uniform, i served to protect. and now i got the opportunity to walk in these great halls with a great man that i know will continue to go on to the senate where they truly do need help with fiscal responsibility and i know that when you look at across just the same as that unit, in december of 1944, when they were surrounded, they sent back one simple response. that they were not going to

surrender. and i think we all know what that one response is. if i can think of one person that would stand on the senate floor and give that same response, it would be senator elect jeff flake. now when i think about the other gentlemen, the governor-elect of -- the other gentleman, the governor-elect of indiana. there was a person who contacted me and if you talked to him he would say, i was supporting allen west before it was cool to be supporting allen west and that's 100% right. because mike pence understood that it's not about the empty promises of outreach to a community. it's about finding those individuals that really and truthfully do believe in constitutional conservative principles and supporting them to get them to a position where they can have a voice. and they can in turn be examples to our black community. that's what mike pence did for me in 2008. he kept encouraging me and even though we fell short on that next day he was the first

person to call and say, i know what type of man you are and i know what type of fighter you are and i know you're going to do it again. and therefore i ended up being here in 2010. and i had the opportunity to be taught, to be coached, and to be mentored by a great man, a great constitutional conservative a man that will go make a difference far state. i think that one day he'll make a difference for our great nation. so as once upon a time a general said as he stood there that old soldiers never die they just fade away, i'm not going to fade away, because these two men have encouraged me to do something better and do something different, to take off a camouflage uniform and put on a suit and tie but continue to fight for the principles and values that make this country great that make this country exceptional. i think that's what we see happening right now. i am so encouraged that we have the right people here in the house, we have the right people

in the senate. we have the right people down in our states to make a difference to secure a better future for all of our children and our grandchildren. so we do not saddle them with a debt we are currently looking at, we do not saddle them with the out of control spending, we do not leave them with an unsecure america and an unstable world. those men that are departing are going to be part of that transformation, that restoration that reclaiming of a sense of american pride and exceptionalism. that when you look at those words up there, in god we trust, we will truly inculcate that back into who we are as a people. so as we go forth, we talk about this thing called the fiscal cliff, i know that these men understand what the right type of tax policies are to create economic growth. we are not about wealth redistribution, we're about wealth expansion. we're about that american dream that can take an inner city kid

from atlanta, georgia, and allow him to be standing here today, speaking to the american people. before incredible men that will go and do more incredible things for this great nation. i believe that we are standing on the verge of a new dawn for america. all we have to do is go back and recommit to those principles and values that our funding fathers accepted. that our founding fathers wrote in the declaration. that they improved and perfected throughout through the constitution. and now they're looking at us in this generation to be the ones that carry on. 236 years and i believe that we will be around for another 236 years. but the test for us right now is that we believe that america is about a bigger government, or do we believe that america is about an indomitable entrepreneurial spirit and if we believe the latter instead of the former, then we will

have the right tax policies, we'll have the right regulatory policies, we will have the right monetary policies, so we're not print manager money, devaluing our dollar, so we see commodity prices going up. will we once again have our small businesses grow, which is a reflection of our entrepreneurial spirit. most importantly, will we respect the individual, their sovereignty, their rights, and their freedoms and make sure that we have the -- strongest, most powerful military that will cause people to say we will not challenge you because they know that what we stand for, this that we will defend, is something we truly do believe in. so as this may be my last time speaking on this house floor, i can tell you that the principles and values that we stand for as constitutional conservatives, you don't have to be in the house of representatives to continue that fight. because it's a fight worth doing. but it's a fight worth doing

because i've had some great men and great women to be examples for me as i go forward. there are many men and women that are standing on freedom's ramparts, our watchmen on the walls, that are trusting and depending upon us right now to make sure that their service, their sacrifice, and their commitment shall not be in vain. so i thank you all, i thank you for your coaching and mentoring, i thank you for the example you set. i thank you for allowing me to be here to speak on this night. may god bless america and may god keep us all forevermore. mrs. blackburn: we thank him so much for his service to the house. i would like to yield to mr. chafe et cetera -- he is not --

chaffetz, he is not seeking time. mr. speaker, as we close for the christmas season, i just want to make a few comments about what has transpired today, and i think it is noteworthy that those members who are departing have talked about what it means to serve in the u.s. house of representatives and how grateful we are they have chosen that service. and we each have made a commitment to make certain that we are committed to pushing, pushing the federal government to get its fiscal house in order. indeed, mr. hensarling many times has said that that is our primary goal as conservatives because we know that the greatest threat to our nation's

security is our nation's debt. many of us talk about admiral cullen's comments when he said the greatest threat to our nation's security is our nation's debt. and this week as we have looked at the so-called fiscal cliff and looked at the expiration of the tax cuts. as we have worked through the growing and just rolling debt that is sweeping over this government, as we have watched this deficit climb higher every year, we have sought to find a solution to this. and as i mentioned earlier in our remarks, we have stood in this house and going back to may 10, we passed reckconsillings may 1, we passed an extension of the 2001, 2003 reductions.

they are culled the bush tax cuts. we passed a sequester bill. and on september 19, we passed a pathway to tax reform. mr. speaker, what is so significant about that is that those pieces of legislation left here, some of them with a bipartisan vote, all with a strong vote from this body, and they traveled across to the senate. and from may to september, they found their place on harry reid's desk. what is so sad about this is that harry reid made his choice and the senate made their choice, and their choice was not to take up those pieces of legislation. this crisis that we have had, our so-called crisis or the fiscal cliff crisis, all of this

is a crisis of their making because it is a crisis of inaction. mr. speaker, many times that is what happens here, that is inaction, what does not get done that causes the situations where there's a rush to the last minute. and we have -- we have had the american people watching closely and we have had the comments from the president, the comments from different ones in the cabinet, the comments from the senate, but i remind my colleagues, we took our actions here in this body and we sent that legislation and we did it because we understand that $16 trillion worth of debt, an annual deficits of a trillion dollars are far too much for our children and grandchildren.

and the speakers tonight who have joined me on this floor have talked about how we have hopes and dreams for our children and for our grandchildren for the futures of our families. and you know what? if you are facing $16, $20, $25 trillion debt as a nation, it is very difficult to see those hopes and dreams come true. my concern as i look at my grandchildren is that the decisions, maybe the selfishness, even, of people in washington who want to tax too much and want to spend too much, who are taxing and spending, not their money, but my children and grandchildren's money, children of the next generation, looters,

maybe a generation or more away, they are spending their money because at this point we are borrowing 46 cents of every dollar we spend. it's not sustainable. so that is why we have very thoughtfully over the last several months approached this issue and it's why this week we have worked with our leadership to find a solution to this, to look at different angles. and the decision came that, you know what? the best decision for this, the best way to approach it, the best way to make certain we address this is to stand firm on the actions that the house has taken. and for the senate to take up the legislation that they have had the opportunity to take up since september 19. they could take up any bill, amend it, they can vote on it.

they can send it back to us, they can go to conference. but you know, as we talk about our children and their future and as we talk about this amount of debt, what we do not want to do is to take our children's future and trade it to the people that hold our debt. and if we're not careful, that's exactly what is going to happen. so as we have gone through this process this week, as my colleagues have all watched it and said exactly what has happened, you know, what are the decisions, what are the consequences of the decisions we have made, are we going to resolve it, i do believe you are going to see a resolution to this and it will happen because the american people are saying to us and they are saying to the president, it is time to get the spending under control.

our children deserve better of us. they have the right to live free lives, to dream big dreams and to make those dreams come true. i do want to say a thank you to our leadership. i think the way speaker boehner has handled these issues this week, the way he has worked with the members in this body to show respect to them, to show respect for their opinions and respect for their constituents, i think that that has been a true sign of leadership that was willing to listen and then willing to move the way the body wanted to move and the decision was made by the body not to move forward on the plan b. but i think in making that decision, what you will see is

our leadership moving forward more committed and with individuals, even more prepared to get to work and to get this solved and to do what the american people are expecting us to do, which is to get the spending under control. they have sent the message loud and clear. washington does not have a revenue problem, it has a spending problem. it has an out-of-control spending problem and an appetite for the taxpayers' money. and as we have worked through this this week and have talked with our constituents and so many of us in this body have done telephone town halls and been on the phone and have answered emails and we know that there is no limit to how much

money, how much of other people's money government will try to spend. there's no limit to how much of the taxpayers' money. so the american people have sent the message to us and we all have sent it to our leadership and they have listened and they have responded. the time to get the spending under control is now. the time to stop kicking the can down the road is now. and we will go away for christmas and return with the strength, resolve and a courage to address the issues, the fiscal issues of this nation. and the house where the spending bills and appropriations process begins, we will tackle this with

strength, with resolve, with courage to get the job done so that just as my colleagues have said here tonight so that future generations have a brighter future and that we will continue to stand for the cause of freedom. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady yields back. does the gentlelady from have a motion? mrs. blackburn: yes. the gentlelady does have the motion. i move that the house do now adjourn. the speaker pro tempore: the question is on the motion to adjourn. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. the ayes have it. the motion is adopted. accordin

>> we spoke to a reporter for an update on the fiscal cliff. >> kate hunter is a congressional correspondent for bloomberg news. how come house speaker boehner could not get enough republican support for his plan b this evening? >> the speaker's proposal that they were going to bring for a

vote on the floor would have raised taxes on those making more than $1 million. there is still enough the public in opposition within his ranks doing that because they were not able to get the vote for it. >> tell us the specific things you were hearing as members left the conference. >> there were a lot of members who were either disappointed that the speaker was not able to get the votes and there were others saying that they felt like the decision to pull the bill was a good thing. >> there were some reports that after that plan b was pulled, speaker boehner might be meeting with president obama. did you anything about that? >> one member said that boehner said he would be speaking with obama shortly.

he said he would be speaking with obama to figure out a way. they do not see this as inclusion in discussion, but that the plan b hit a brick wall. >> eric cantor released a statement that the house will be out until after christmas. what happens between christmas and new year's? is there anything likely to happen then? >> i read a story earlier this week that both sides do have certain incentives to wait until after the first of the year. some taxes will have gone up. we might have a partial tax cut or a full tax cut.

i think there definitely are certain incentives from both sides that are looking at a deal to wait until after the first of the year to strike that deal. i do not think that anyone is really fundamentally at that point yet. there will be a concerted effort to try to reach an agreement and get something done before the end of the year. >> in a statement, the speaker put the ball back to the senate saying it is up to the president to work with senator reid to avert the fiscal cliff. center -- the senate becomes a bigger player had? >> that is more speaker boehner tried to put the blame on the senate. negotiations have been happening between the president and the

speaker. it seems as though that is where the deal will have to come from. if it were to come from obama and senator reid, they would come up with one right now. the problem is whatever deal the democrats have will have to get through the republican- controlled house. where the focus is and where the attention will be is what goes on between obama and boehner. >> you can follow kate hunter on twitter. thank you for the update. >> thanks so much.

i am not doing a sesame street skit here. that is what we are talking about. plan b. i think about plan aid. that is what the majority in the house of representatives -- plan a. it is designed to put something into place. what democrats and republicans like and support. meaningful, strong, bold plans for a simpler, fairer tax code. the president reforms tack -- supports tax reform. taking the top corporate tax rate from 35% to 25%. that is a positive area of agreement we have. i will say we in the majority have been trying to put into

place a real, meaningful tax people that can ensure uphel can reduce rates and generate domestic growth. the trouble with that is our plan a has been designed to bring about a reduction of size and scope and the reach of the federal government. everyone knows what that means. real entitlement reform. plan a consists of two simple things. pro-growth tax reform that will keep taxes low for individuals and job creators, and small businesses in this country, so we can encourage that kind of job creation which we all

aspire, and a reduction of the mammoth size of this behemoths. we all know it encourages a cycle of dependence which has been generational and it is essential we turn from it. just getting our fiscal house in order dealing with the $16 trillion national debt and is only part of that. encouraging individual initiative and responsibility, creating pride in individuals by pulling back entitlements spending, is the right thing for us to do as a nation. that is what the plan consists of. if you look at where we are today, we know 11 days from now, we are going over the fiscal cliff. what does that mean?

every single american who pays income taxes will see a tax increase go into effect. we also know there will be a massive sequester. we just evaded the rule on the national defense authorization act, it will have a devastating impact on our national security. increasing taxes on working americans will create a scenario which will hinge on our ability to encourage the kind of domestic product growth that is important for us and for our economic security and overall n.

, and try to make sure hamas you address it and have what is necessary for our national security. as the look at these issues, we are going through a troubling time. we have a divided government. we have a democratic president and a republican house of representatives. i happen to believe that creates an opportunity. i did not vote for barack obama, but i do believe that having a president in one party and a house in another party does create an opportunity for

us to work together in a bipartisan way. we know if my party won everything, it would have been tough for us. it is a political attack that would be taking place from the other side of the aisle. working together, i believe we can tackle this issue. that is really what we desire. that is the right thing to do. we are in the midst of a very tough negotiations taking place between two people. the president, and the speaker of the house of representatives, john boehner. i want to express my appreciation of my colleagues. i have been a minority. i have served in the minority from 1980 to 1994.

it is challenging. it is not easy. we are a 11 days away from going over the fiscal cliff and we feel strongly about the need for this institution to state its position on this. i know we have heard mr. reed indicate he does not want to bring up, if this bill passes, this measure. and the president has put out a policy that this bill would not gain his signature. i do not think anyone is convinced we will pass here. -- that the bill passing here will be one that will end in agreement. the goal is for work to proceed. and for institutions to stake their position. we happen to believe mr. boehner has made some bold steps.

in working to ensure we do not go over that fiscal cliff. we are in a position today where the action and we will take will be a positive step to enhance the chance for a resolution to this. the process is not perfect. i will say this. if you look at what it is that is 10-year reduction, a reconciliation package that passed this house of representatives earlier treat -- earlier this year, a measure before us that will be debated as one that has pared back from the measure to pass the house of representatives, and the only ournges that have been made t

to accommodate the date change. we know what this is. for those who might claim the reconciliation package we have is imposing cuts, which will be devastating for those struggling in this country, i remind them of the alternative, which happens to be sequestered. it is our hope this reconciliation package will play a role in insuring the sequester that would be devastating. it would be devastating for it not to take place. this is the alternative. the package we have will see rate increases for those earning $1 million, 0.19% of the

american federal tax bear piper -- taxpayer. all the rest of the americans, the overwhelming majority will avoid seeing the tax increase go into affect. i would also like to say we have to remember if you look at the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts that became public law, part of that law, current law, makes it clear we actually would see the rates, the top-rated 39.6%. that is part of the 2003 agreements pahan. any action less than that is actually a tax cut. we need to recognize that. mr. speaker, what we are doing, and i appreciate again the understanding of the minority, is simply trying to move ahead

with this good faith negotiating process that speaker boehner and the president spoke of. in light of the balanced approach to the package, i hope -- this package has enjoyed statements of support from democrats in the past. from both the house and the senate. i hope this can be a positive step as we seek to resolve just as quickly as we can. our goal is to put ain place the kind of certainty to encourage job creators to have the kind of opportunity that is necessary.

>> good afternoon. , no need to call the family to see any history being made. just move along. nothing happening. this plan does not come anywhere close to being a solution to the fiscal cliff. it is a political gimmick. all of us recognize it has no chance of becoming law. the process that brought us here has been equally shameful. developing countries -- countries in the greatest democracy on earth. it has been absolutely painful to watch the otherwise responsible members of the majority play their assigned roles attending what last night -- what we did last night is normal.

facing the impending fiscal cliff that could devastate our economy and harm millions of americans, the majority decided to put together a last-minute legislation on a prayer. last night, the rules committee spent most of the evening debating legislation. even if the debate is taking place, it was dropped into our lap. it turned out to be a bill that went through the house of presented -- of representatives. that is how the majority wants to solve the greatest economic threat facing our nation. with nothing less than millions of dollars on the line, does the

majority really believe this will do nothing? we prepare a vote on this legislation and i think adjourned for the final time this year. if this is a final attempt to reach the compromise, our nation faces finding times. we may face the greatest displacement of workers since 1929 as sequestration takes effect and forces countless layoffs. how devastating is that to a report -- recovering economy. every american knows we cannot let this happen. i believe everyone knows we never would. after last night, i am not so sure. this is not a serious solution to avoid economic catastrophe. is one last tax on the poor and middle-class right before we go

off together over the fiscal cliff. today's bill contains many dangerous provisions. part see we got last night -- part c we got last night in which the 25 million working americans would pay more on taxes. the drastic cuts, they could not adjourn this year without one more last attempt to destroy the health care bill that will provide health care for millions more americans, covered by insurance is they have never been able to have before. during my last election last month, i met more than one person.

without any health insurance. she was born with several posse and had a pre-existing condition. -- sorry broad policy and had a pre-existing -- sorry breaux palsy -- she was born with cerebral palsy and had a pre- existing condition. 2 million americans would lose their unemployment assistance right here at the holiday time. as i said before, the program would be gutted. those on just cuts would leave

millions struggling to pay their bills and put food on the table. americans we are talking about are not the ones that cause the problem in this country. they have nothing to do with financial services. continually, this house asks them to pay the price. enough already. they are not to blame and they should not be put on the block. sadly, just days ago, it appeared president obama and speaker boehner were close to a fiscal cliff compromise. president obama made concessions. some that are -- that our side is not crazy about. the house of the majority started walking away announcing what they will do in a take-it- or-leave-it manner and introduced a political hopes for us today.

do not anybody be fooled. the american people know better and see through this. they know a compromise means that we must meet in the middle. the majority continues to think if they pass extreme legislation and then run for the hills, the rest of us will be forced to give in. we have seen similar antics for the majority. holding the credit of this nation for the first time in history hostage and losing our credit rating, to voting 33 times to repeal health care reforms. the majority has continually advanced cynical and partisan agenda at the expense of our nation's welfare. given this, it is no surprise the approval rating for congress is at an all-time low. historians have said it is the least productive congress in our history.

in the election just last month, the american people made their voices heard. when asked to choose between the extreme agenda, they said no. they wanted not to be going over a fiscal cliff and they have made it very clear. what we have done is risk of the economic future of this country debating this fiscal cliff as long as we have. i am not clear on what we are doing today unless it is to cut and run. in the process, the majority has presided over shameful legislation not worthy of this institution. when our nation is in desperate need of serious solutions, the majority is doing everything in its power to avoid finding the answers. i strongly oppose this before us and i urge my colleagues on

births -- on both sides of the aisle to reverse this rule and i reserve the balance of my time. >> the gentle lady reserves. >> i yield to associate myself with remarks my good friend has made as it relates to the sequestered. i agree with her completely. it is very important we not let the sequestered take place. i hope and believe she is right we will not see that happen. i would like to associate myself with her remarks as it relates to ensuring we do not go over the fiscal cliff. that is something that is very desire on our part. i would also like to respond to one point very quickly. i can provide my friend the assurance we will not be

adjourning the conference today and ending our work. i have said that we are going to continue with our work. the action we will take as it relates to the two measures, the reconciliation package, which is designed to ensure we do not see sequestration, which we all know would be devastating. it is a package of $238 billion. it is a very responsible measure that is not going to be getting -- cutting programs. >> may you yield? i recall we asked last night for assurance the bill we are looking at is the bill we would vote on parrot all we got was

doublespeak. >> if i could reclaim my time. >> i will give it back to you. >> i will say again, i have served as long in the minority as john. i have served longer in the minority than the dean of the house has served. i understand. i served 18 years in the minority. i understand it is challenging. i respect that fact. to say we are dealing with the very end of the session, that we are not trying to get to an agreement, is a mischaracterization of where we are. i have associated myself with remarks from my friend as it relates, and to say the package we have and the deals of the reduction of $238 is again --

is again one that can responsibly address and be a first step toward something we all know needs to be done. as i talked to democrats, there is recognition that entitlement and -- retirement reform has to take place. -- entitlement reform has to take place. my fellow californian. >> 2.5 minutes. >> i think my friend for healing. -- yielding. the debate, i am afraid we are losing touch with common sense. there is no bill before the congress that proposes raising taxes on millionaires or anybody else.

there is a law that takes affect on january 1 that will raise taxes on millionaires and small businesses filing as millionaires, and everybody else. there is a bill to protect everybody else from that law. that is the issue before us today. the president says he wants to protect everybody except those greedy millionaires and billionaires. that is precisely what this bill does. he has vowed to veto it. the truth is, he wants everybody who is making over $200,000, that includes $1.30 million small businesses -- 1.3 million small businesses. that is 84% of net small business income. precisely the income they used to produce two-thirds of the jobs in our economy. the congressional budget office warned us about the eath the

rich crusade. 700,000 lost jobs. house republicans now have a choice. we can try to save as many americans as the president will permit, or we can end up at an impasse that ensures taxes go up on everyone. let us pass this bill. if it does not work, let us pass whatever level the president will agree to. is not as if we have not repeatedly warned him. my conservative colleagues say sparing some people these tax increases is tantamount to racism among others. a lifeguard who sees 10 swimmers drowning, if he can only save nine, that does not mean he has drowned the 10th one. no lifeguard would be worth his

pay if he said, my principle is nobody should drowned off my beach. if i cannot save them all, i will not save any. americans watched as thousands of middle-class jobs are sacrifice on the ideological obama next year, this country will be a lot wiser. until then, let's save the weekend. >> the done in's time has expired. >> i am pleased to yield three minutes. >> the gentleman from michigan is recognized for 3 minutes. >> this is an important moment. these bills move the nation dangerously closer to the cliff. with only 11 days before our

nation will go over. they make finding common ground far more difficult, with only 11 days left to find it. these bills are not a plan. they are a ploy. they are to know where. they undermine trust so essential for agreement. we just heard it. the republicans claim letting the tax rate go up from 35 to 39.6 on income over $1 million is not a tax hike because it would happen on its own. then they say if the tax cut would go up on income below $1 million by happening on its own, it would be the biggest tax increase on -- in history. that is inconsistent.

far worse than the hypocrisy is the way they design their tax provisions. for those with incomes over $1 million, they provide a tax cut of at least $50,000. they raise only one-third of the revenue contained in the speaker's discussions in the white house and far less than proposed by the president. talk about undermining trust. they would raise taxes on 11 million middle-class tax yers.rs -- paris -- pari there is silence, stone hearted silence on 2 million unemployed workers looking for work who would lose their insurance immediately on december 29.

silence on this 20 per it -- on the 27%. in a deeply cynical move, so cynical, the republicans have decided to offer another bill to put off some of the sequester. they pay for it how? deep and ugly cuts impacting seniors, kids. the republicans are tying themselves into not. in doing so, they are tying into knots the chances for our nation not going over the cliff. vote no on these bills that take us backward, that undercut trust, that increase the chances of going over the fiscal cliff. this is not a plan.

this is a ploy. >> i would like to inquire of my friend how many speakers she has remaining. it looks like a couple. i will reserve the balance of my time. >> i would be happy to tell you. four. >> the gem and reserves. >> thank you. three minutes right now. the gentleman thafrom massachusetts. >> recognize for three minutes. >> thank you for the time. just when i thought the process could not get worse, last night, the republicans reached a new low. we were originally told we were meeting on the plan the tax bill, which continues the prow republican tradition of protecting tax cuts for the wealthy at the expense of middle

class families and poor people. then we were told there would be a new bill that was introduced in the middle of the hearing. i am not sure what to call this one. plan b, two. know. -- plan b 2.0. it cuts $36 billion from the program, taking food off the tables of struggling american spirit millions of households would see a cut in their benefits. millions of families would have less food tomorrow than they do today. hundreds of thousands of kids would lose their access to free school meals. it is enough to make ebenezer scrooge embarrassed. the bill threatens medicare, children's programs, education, infrastructure, and it

threatens our economy as a whole. does anyone really believe there is not a single dollar to be saved anywhere in the pentagon? the american people have spoken. they have made it loud and clear they want a balanced approach that casts the wealthiest americans to pay a little bit more. it protect our seniors, children, and our most vulnerable neighbors. the republican leaders refuse to listen. let me say another thing. i would say my republican freshman colleague -- i remember the promises of things you said would change. i would say, you own this now. you have officially become part of the problem, if not the problem.

it is a vote against accountability. let me say this, my republican friends have made it on fashionable to worry about the poor and the elderly and the vulnerable. i urge my colleagues not to turn your backs on the most needy. let's balance our budget in a way that does not lower the quality of life or decrease the standard of living. we can do so much better. instead of doing this, you should be negotiating with the president. go back to the negotiating president and stop the game. >> i yield 5 minutes to my friend from georgia, a very hard-working member of the house committee. >> 5 minutes. >> i think my chairman for yielding me the time. i came down here to talk about

the tax policy and my support for the rule, but when folks back home ask me what is wrong with this place, i will start talking about this debate. there is a serious topic on the floor right now. this fiscal cliff, this is a serious issue for our economy, working families, and for small businesses we are counting on bringing us out of recession. everyone believes that. as we are down here trying to have that discussion, in the short, 11 days we have left, i hear that our tax package, which does exactly what the president asks, i think it is wrong, i think we ought to keep tax rates low for everyone, but the president says no. this bill does that.

as my friend reminded me, when i ran as part of this freshman class, i said, let's try to make things more simple. we know what happens at the end of this year. we know the christmas tree bills that come rolling to the floor, where you handle 100 different unrelated things at a time. i would be interested in pulling folks without a voting card. i would be interested in knowing what folks listening to this debate believe is happening. i have been told that this tax bill throws americans off unemployment. it does no such thing. no such thing. do we need to deal with unemployment? yes we do. in an unemployment bill. i have been told this tax bill to cut payments to doctors. it does no such thing. there is not one line in this bill that does any such thing. do we need to deal with medicare?

of course. do we need to jumble all of these things together in a straightforward tax bill? the answer is no. i am told by my friend is not just silence on these issues. it is stone hearted to be silent. we advance thisvanc debate by calling the absence of a provision stone hearted on the part of the authors? do not tell me about violating trust. do not tell me about how it is polls ought to work properly together. we have the opportunity right now. folks are throwing it away line by line by line. my friend comes to the floor and he says, this bill throws folks off food stamps. nonsense.

every single time i go to a town hall meeting, folks believe that if only we eliminate the fraud in government, we will balance the budget. due to the spending, we are way far out of balance. fraud will not do it. that will not be enough. what the underlying bill does to eliminate the defense sequester cuts president obama has called dangerous, it says, the only people who should get food stamps are people who qualify for food stamps. that is right. the underlying bill says the only folks who should get food stamps are those who qualify. it turns out, like every federal program, there is fraud. some folks are receiving taxpayer-sponsored benefits today who have not earned them, who do not find themselves entitled to them by virtue of their circumstances.

because this bill aims to eliminate the fraud, folks come to the floor and say, why are republicans throwing hungry people out during christmas. it is outrageous. we cannot have a conversation about serious things in a serious time. the outrageous pointed to last night, what happened last night is exactly what i would hope would happen in a conversation like this. almost to a person, every democratic member in that rules committee said, all we have in front of us is a tax bill. all we have in front of us is a tax bill and every one in america knows the problem is not taxes. where are the spending cuts? the rules committee staff went to work immediately. and found a package not that had never been seen or read before,

but one that had passed this body in a bipartisan way. they said, the criticism from my colleagues is right. we need to do this and we did. >> an additional 30 seconds. >> i think my chairman for the additional time. there is a fence in this country that folks in washington d.c. just want to argue about things, that they do not want to solve anything at all. you made accurate criticism last the night that i am glad we addressed. we have a straightforward tax bill today. a straightforward bill. this is the wrong way -- this is not the wrong way to do things. this is the right way to do things paired with only 11 days left, -- things. with only 11 days left, let's

pass this rule. >> a message from the president. >> i am directed by the president to deliver to the house of representatives a message in writing. >> i am pleased to yield two minutes. >> two minutes. >> thank you. i right in opposition to this rule and the underlying legislation. but this is to deliver more tax breaks to the wealthy. under this legislation, those making under $1 million a year will receive an average -- over $1 million a year will receive a tax cut.

meanwhile, 25 million working families will take an average of $1,000 more in taxes. for those families struggling to find work in this economy, this bill is equally bad. 2 million americans will lose unemployment benefits next month, pushing them into the cold. retirees and seniors also, with a 27% cut in medicare payments. 50 million seniors will see their health care in danger. what american people are watching right here, right now, it is a tragic comedy. the other side knows quite well even if this legislation passes today, it is going nowhere. here we are. time is running out. rather than coming out with a real compromise, we are playing

another game of trades. -- charades. i urge my colleagues to reject this bill so we can come up with a solution that will become law. address fiscal challenges while protecting families. >> may i inquire how much time on each side? >> 7 and 14 minutes. >> the gentleman from new york'. >> thank you. i yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from texas. >> recognized for 3 minutes. >> i thank the gentle lady and the chairman. when i mention the words hurricane sandy and the tragedy

in newton, connecticut, many would wonder what do they have in common. an enormous gun tragedy and the loss of 26 lives, and americans suffering from a devastating storm. our hearts go out to those babies lost. it speaks to americans in need. that is why i am so trouble to be on the floor today. the framework we have says to america when you are in need, we will not be prepared to help you. what is disappointing, and i know for the speaker, it is probably the same case. just about three days ago, we thought there was a deal. between the white house and the framework offered.

of this leadership house. it is disappointing. in the course of a couple of days, we have come to a situation where this plan, plan b, raises only about $300 billion from high income households. the centers for budget priority suggests millionaires would get tax cuts over $1 million. what would the middle class get? plan b and aroused -- allows the old bush tax cuts to continue to continue the deductions for the rich, giving them more opportunities to keep their money. we will lose $400 million under this plan in high income revenues. disappointing. at the same time, there is a thought we should cut social

security by changing the way it is calculated. if they buy food, that means they need cheap social security. we thought there was a deal. i cannot agree with that at all. cutting social security. i cannot agree with recalculating. what i will tell you is this plan raises taxes rather than reducing it as the president wants to do, as this house of democrats wants to do, as the senate bill of democrats wants to sign. this raises taxes $1,000 on 25 million working families. then there is a mysterious bill that suggests we are in the business of making cuts. do you know what that will do? there is no sequester plan in this plan that is here. education, research, national security. it cuts the hard-working

americans and it cuts off 2 million of them. cut out doctors -- it cuts out doctors. >> may i ask my friend to yield? i just wanted to inquire. i did not understand there is no sequester here. we are dealing with the threat of a sequester and our idea is to hundred $38 billion in spending reductions within the reconciliation bill that passed the house next may. i did not understand. i will yield for an additional 30 seconds. >> when we started out with plan b, there was no sequester plan. there was a mysterious offering last evening. >> there is a plan to respond to this question. $238 billion reduction over a

10-year period of time. >> i thank the gentleman. in the original plan b, i no sequester planned. you were right in the creative work of your staff. you filed the reconciliation that had been addressed. a lot of us voted against it. all of us voted against it. we've got -- we understand that plan will have no traction. i thank the gentleman for his work. there is no sequester plan. there was no sequestered plan for plan b period if i could quickly go back -- plantae. -- plan b peri.

it cut by 27%, doctors there it 50 million americans will have their health care in jeopardy. my comment as i close, it is in because we have americans who are looking to us back to work with the president's, to work with the speaker, and to find a way to be able to answer the question. i yield back. >> i reserve the balance of my time.

>> it has been said here before the bill mysteriously appeared last night and pass the house in a bipartisan way. it was bipartisan opposition. no democrat voted for it and 16 republicans voted no. >> recognized for one minute. >> i rise in opposition to this rule. in the dead of night, five days before christmas, house republicans released legislation they are rushing to the floor to gut funding for health care, food assistance, and other vital social services. christmas is a season of giving. republicans are taking food off the table from millions of american families that are struggling in the tough economic times, like cutting food assistance by $36 billion. taking the unemployment lifeline away from more than 2 million

americans who are trying to get back on their feet. taking money away from grants that provide productive services for abused children. why would republicans insist on taking so much away from our families during this holiday season? so they could give an average $50 thousand -- $50,000 tax breaks for millionaires. stand up for millions of children, workers, families who are facing a real cliff. >> the gentleman from california. >> speaker, i am happy to yield two minutes to a very thoughtful colleague from the rules committee. >> two minutes. >> thank you. let's review. we have a fiscal cliff occurring at the beginning of next year. 12 short days. that means taxes go up for

everybody who pays taxes and across-the-board spending cuts. the democrat alternative was rejected at in a bipartisan basis earlier this year. our bill has been rejected in the senate. the speaker and the president have been talking. president has not been serious. today is an attempt to try to save most americans, mr. speaker, 99.8 americans. from seen their taxes go up. small-business owners will see their taxes go up if this plan is not pass -- is not passed versus the other bill. these business owners employ many tens of thousands of people in america in the middle class. the bill before us is a

comprehensive bill. it gives us -- we have heard testimony after testimony from business owners give us certainty. the democrat alternative is not even comprehensive. does not include the state tax. we will be right back here again december next year. this gives us certainty and employers certainty. job greater certainty. americans certainty they will not ever pay the tax again. this is the right medicine for 99.8% of americans to prevent them from seeing their taxes go up on january 1 and it gives us an opportunity in the next session of congress to provide top -- to provide comprehensive tax reform to simplify our tax code to give us more certainty and more competitiveness so the middle class can grow and prosper and we can improve our

economy. >> i am delighted to yield three minutes from the gentleman in tennessee. >> 3 minutes. >> thank you. i appreciate the time and opportunity to speak on this measure. i am concerned about the fiscal cliff. it is important. president obama has tried to work with the opposition party. gone from what he was elected on, increasing taxes for film it -- for fairness, a $400,000. that was not enough. this proposal goes to $1 million. $400,000 is plenty comfortable. president has gone a long way. there is a lot of revenue being lost between $400,000.10 dollars million. we need that revenue to recognize -- to rescue -- to

rectify the wrongs. this bill has cut funding. our physical cliff. i want to talk to you about how this fiscal cliff affects the physical cliff. it comes up with research dollars to allow for our live to be extended. at duke university, there is a great long transplant program. lung transplant program. they need the money to perfect it. it is only a 50% chance that a person will live eight years lung transplant.plant -- in my home town, there is a

hospital. one of the finest liver transplant doctors in the country. there are people like this throughout the country. kyle took chances and childhood illnesses. this bill cuts funds. they should not be cut ever. they should be increased. they do not know right now they may not -- they made the the people who need that transplant or some other medical science ,cure. sciencecure -- cure. we find these cures and new procedures to research.

doctors need to be paid, hospitals need to be paid, research needs to be undertaken. i believe the president has done a great distance on the fiscal cliff to get to $400,000. he has caught -- talk about cutting programs that deal with the most vulnerable people, the poorest, on social security tax increases, which i oppose. cost of living increases, excuse me. the president has tried. i hope this bill fails and we deal with the president in a responsible way and avoid the fiscal and the physical cliff. >> thank you. i yield one minute to the member of the appropriations committee, our hard-working friend from georgia and his father. >> the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> the president owns this economy. he owns the high unemployment

rate, the 23 million americans who are under or unemployed. he owns the lack of jobs and opportunity. he owns the $750 billion annual deficit. it is time for the president to step up. knowing this fiscal cliff was going to put -- was going to take place for well over a year, the president has not acted in good faith. what we are doing today is three things. number one, we are moving a centralized negotiation back to where it should become a decentralized basis, so forges 35 house members can vote and speak on it and express their baby opinion. hopefully the senate can take it and amend, but this debate belongs inside the united states capitol. last year, we heard so much

%.out the 99 percen this will give tax breaks to them. it is permanent. this is good for the economy. it is good for economic growth. i urge a yes vote on the rule. >> i have no further. >> and from california. gentleman from california. gentleman reserves his time. >> i cannot say it enough. the legislation is a step backward. plan b, plan c, neither is a serious proposal but are

designed to get headlines. they are making it harder to find common sense solutions to the impending fiscal cliff. the time for the games is over. it is time the majority comes nobody wants to see the taxes raised on 25 million working families. they seem to be called upon to raise the price for the fiscal irresponsibility of the financial district. the american people do not want to see hundreds of thousands lose access to fiscal programs. i am sure they can tell you they do not want to see wall street reforms repealed and the historic lot dismantled. all these things would happen if this bill became law. i strongly urge my colleagues to reject the proposal and a return to the serious work of balancing our budget while

protecting the poor and working- class. mr. speaker, i will offer an amendment to this role which will allow the house to have a chance to vote on the bill passed by the senate to extend the middle-class tax cuts for all persons making less than $250,000, which was introduced in the house as hr 15. this would prevent the house from adjourning until we have averted the fiscal cliff and the president has signed legislation to prevent tax increases on the middle-class. mr. speaker, i ask unanimous in -- consent to put the amendment in the reference along with extraneous material. >> without objection. >> so i urge my colleagues urge myno -- to --no on the bill and i yield back the balance of my sign. >> the gentleman from

california? >> speaker, let me say that we all know we are 11 days away from going over the fiscal cliff. thee trying to make sure sequester does not come into place. we all know that secretary panetta has said that would be a devastating thing for our nation's security. i think the discussions taking place between the president of the united states and the speaker of the house are very important. i also think it is important for every member of the house to let an opportunity to stay where they stand on these issues. the bill before us is one which has again basically enjoyed bipartisan support. i remember when center schumer made it clear he believed that there should not be any increase for anyone who earns under $1 million. that was what he said -- and other was a lot of discussion in

the democratic caucus as to what that level should be. that was the level center schumer had indicated he supported earlier on. i have to say to my friends from rochester -- we are not planning to adjourn. we want to address this issue. we want to do everything we possibly can to resolve this just as quickly as we possibly can. we are just a few days away from christmas. obviously we are still here working. we are prepared to come back after christmas. sadly, many of our colleagues are going to the funeral of a center inouye, and that service will take place in hawaii and it has created a challenge for us as it relates to the schedule. we understand that this is a difficult, difficult time. we need to work together to put in place pro-growth and economic policies. i think, as i said in my opening

remarks, there is a bipartisan way to do that. commend the president for his proposal to lower the corporate tax rate. real tax reform -- this can be done in a bipartisan way. real entitlement reform does not hurt our fellow americans. that is something that can be done in a responsible way. i will simply say that this is not a perfect process, but it is the end of the session -- the process is going on right now to deal with a tough situation. we do not want afro-americans to be hurting, especially at this time of year -- we do not want our fellow americans to be hurting, especially at this time of year. i think we can see an agreement which will work to ensure that does not take place. mr. speaker, i urge my colleagues to support the rule, support the andrews -- underline

legislation, both taxes and the effort to insure we do not see a sequester take place to bring about $30 billion of spending over 10-years -- this is the right thing for us to do to get on a path that provides certainty, which we all know is necessary. i urge support of the rule and the underlying legislation. with that, i yield back the balance of my time. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2012] >> speaker john boehner and house republicans pulled the rule because it did not have enough votes to pass it. it would have raised taxes on people earning more than $1 million a year. earlier, the chamber agreed to replace some of the automatic spending cuts set to go into th.

>> is what we should be doing -- it sets aside the sequester on defense and non-defense discretionary, cuts mandatory spending, and discretionary spending by lowering the caps. the result of this is we believe it is better to identify specific spending cuts, waste, fraud, abuse in the federal government, in order to prevent the sequester from occurring. this sets aside the question for one year. in exchange, it has a spending reduction of $236 billion. we think the path forward is even lower spending, which is what is achieved. with that, i would like to yield five minutes to the gentleman, the chairman of the house armed services committee. >> today we will send a way out

of this fiscal crisis. rather than react in defense of the president's position, i urge the other body to treat this package as a good-faith effort to protect america's middle- class and small businesses from harmful tax hikes and reduce spending to resolve sequestration. we know the president is willing to put adjustments to entitlements on the table. this proposal provides a framework for us to reach a bipartisan agreement on how to do that. if we fail to act, on january 2, a hammer strike will fall on america's armed forces. it will be one of the most significant and damaging blow to our troops and and national security in history. without even the stroke of a pen, sequester will do incredible injury to a military that of generations to build. it will take generations to fix. the blow will not come from an enemy, but from our own inability to fulfil the basic

obligations of governance. we must stop substituting regular order with brinksmanship. we must not allow impasses of our own doing to our armed forces. i call on the president to lead rather than create new crisis. we cannot stand idly by while we have american men and women fighting to keep us safe across the globe. it is a disgrace that the president decided to use them as pawns in these negotiations, and it is a disgrace that we have not managed to rescue them yet. my leadership made me promise -- sequestration would not happen. today, for the sixth time, they are bringing a measure to a floor in an effort to keep that promise. i thank them for what they have done and wish we could have done even more. the american people were also promised that sequestration would not happen. many times over his campaign and in the presence of our troops and veterans, the commander in

chief made that promise. sequestration would not happen. yet as we stand here today, days away from the catastrophe the president of united straits has not lifted a -- of the united states has not lifted a finger. we will likely return to washington after christmas, but the 60,000 american troops in afghanistan do not have that luxury. we asked them to bear the pain of combat. i hope we will not askin to shoulder the way of washington's irresponsibility. every man and woman who serves in this chamber and in the one down the hall and in the oval office down the street already stewards of a sacred trust. we have all put our left hand on a bible and raise our right hand and made a secret pledge. part of that pledge is to defend the men and women who put their lives on the line to defend us. if we allow the year to end without resolving sequestration, we will all be in direct and

unforgivable violation of that trust. i debated and reason with my colleagues, and now i debate you -- a deal -- do not that the year and without ending sequestration. i urge passage of this measure. >> the gentleman from maryland, mr. van hollen. >> thank you, mr. speaker. i want to say to my friend, the chairman of the budget committee, thank you. thank you, mr. speaker -- i want to say to my friend the chairman of the budget committee, i have great respect for him. i hope he will not take it the wrong way, but i am glad to have you back. we look forward to working with you next year. i hope we will be able to work in a bipartisan way, starting right now. unfortunately, that does not appear to be the case. we are engaged here in the house

on this floor today in what has become a ridiculous political stunt which will actually take us much closer as a country to going over the fiscal cliff. we are wasting valuable time. the speaker should be engaged with the president of the united states in the negotiations rather than having morwalked away from those negotiations. that walking away is becoming a bad habit. the president put on the table a balanced budget plan that calls for shared responsibility. it calls for $1.20 trillion in additional revenues from high income earners over the next 10 years and $1.20 trillion in additional cuts if you include the interest savings over the next 10 years. by the way, that $1.20 trillion in cuts comes on top of the over $1 trillion in cuts that have already been agreed to this year. to our colleague, the distinguished chairman of the

armed services committee, when he says the president has not lifted a finger, that is not true. that is just not true. in fact, the proposal to cut the $1.20 trillion would also remove sequestered for at least one year and 8410. it is more cuts totaled and what we are talking about on the floor here today. what we really have, mr. speaker, is the fact that too many of our republican colleagues still think that compromise is a dirty word. that is what brings us to the floor today in a this political exercise. as has unfortunately been the case throughout the year, the republican package that we are dealing with today has two objectives. one objective is to minimize the impact of the budget challenge on high-income earners and to shift that burden on up to middle-income earners and

working people. the numbers tell the story. because if we go over the fiscal cliff, people earning over $1 million will face a significant income tax hike. but under the republican plan b, compared to the senate plan that is before this house right now, the house republican plan would give those millionaires a $50,000 tax break on average. you know who will pay more -- on the republican plan b? a whole lot of middle-class families. 11 million families will see an average of $1,000 of tax increase because the republican plan b takes away the tuition tax credit. 12 million families will lose the enhanced child tax credit. that is $800 more of burden.

the eitc, 6 million families. the typical u.s. army private, including those men and women serving us in afghanistan today, married with a newborn infant, will see a $453 increase in taxes as a result of republican plan b. on average, 25 million families will pay an average of $1,000 more so that 402,000 families who make over $1 million can get an average tax break of $50,000. that is the tax part of republican plan b. now we are here today right now talking about the cutting part of republican plan b. i think all of us recall during the election, the republican presidential candidate said "there are 47% of the people who

will vote for the president no matter what." then he went on to say, "my job is not to worry about those people." you know what? the republicans'questor cutting plan today is making the nominee's promise come true. it sends a signal that our republican colleagues just do not care about the 47% because you know who gets hit -- here is what it would do. this is according to the congressional budget office. this is a recycled version. we had virtually the same bill on this for last spring. we're just doing it again. the bill did not one single democratic vote. now it is brought here on the premise of some kind of bipartisan approach. the reason it did not get democratic support is while they are providing these tax breaks to people who make over $1 million compared to what it would be, 22 million children

will face reduced or eliminated food benefits. that is according to the congressional budget office. 1.8 million americans will permanently lose food assistance. of those, nearly 300,000 children will lose their school free or reduced lunch program. so what this sequester avoidance plan does is make good on the promise that republicans do not care about the 47%. that is why it did not give any democratic votes last spring. that is why mr. speaker i urge my colleagues to vote against it today. >> mr. speaker, i yield myself such time as i may consume. my friend -- i will start off by saying this is a farce. this is not real. this is what congress is supposed to do -- let's review what this legislation is or is

not. number one, six congressional committees when through their areas of jurisdiction to look for areas where spending can be reduced. to look for areas where there is government duplication. to look for areas where there was government waste and fraud. they reported out of these committees -- we package it together here. we ought to be doing this each and every year. more to the point, mr. speaker, this package of spending cuts is built on at the fact that we actually pass a budget to pay off the debt. we passed a budget to make sure nobody gets a tax increase. that is a lot more than the president can say. the president's but it was voted down unanimously in the house and the senate. the senate has not passed a budget in three years. we do not just have a fiscal cliff, we have a fiscal abyss in front of us.

that is the debt crisis that is on our horizon. failure to address this debt crisis means not just 47% of americans, but every american gets hurt. every american gets a lower standard of living. every american, especially the next generation, receives a lower standard of living if we do not fix this mess. so what is this we're doing here today? we are saying, we do not think the across the board sequester is good policy. we think it will harm our national security. the first and primary responsibility of the federal government. we want to replace next year's cuts with even more spending cuts that we think are smart spending cuts. the gentleman is talking about all these people who will lose food stamps and free and reduced lunches -- let me say it really clearly. every single person who qualifies for food stamps will get food stamps. every single child who

qualifies for free and reduced lunch will get free and reduced lunch. what we're saying is you actually have to qualify for these benefits to get these benefits, and that is not the case today. we are spending so much money from this government that people who did not even qualify for these benefits, who make more than they should to qualify for them, are getting these benefits. there's a lot of waste. there is a lot of fraud. there's a lot of abuse in how our federal tax base is being spent. we are beginning to rain that in with this downpayment. with respect to taxes, what we're trying to do here is limit the damage to the taxpayer. there is not a single tax increase we are proposing here, not a single -- what we're saying is, prevent as many tax increases as possible from hitting anyone in this economy. you know what -- it is not a very good economy. look -- elections have

consequences. we understand that. ivo people understand that. the consequence of this election is we have a president who in every proposal he has given us has called for net spending increases along with tax increases. he used to say we had to cut $3 of spending for every $1 of tax increases. he is not even doing that. the latest proposal says let's raise taxes and then raise spending. mr. speaker, that is what got us into trouble in the first place. with that i would like to yield four minutes to the gentleman from -- the chairman of the financial services committee. >> the gentleman from alabama. >> thank you, mr. speaker. mr. speaker, the gentleman from maryland, mr. van hollen, says this is political theater, that

this is a waste of time. well, let me tell you that the financial services committee has cut $35 billion of unnecessary waste and spending. it started with the bailout money -- $29 billion that dodd- frank said if a too big to fail company goes broke we are going to pay off their creditors and counter parties. did the american people not tell us in it to designate and two dozen 9 what they fell -- 2008 and 2009 what they thought about using their money to bail out creditors? people making $40,000.50000 dollars a year would have to pay as -- $40,000 and $50,000 a year would have to pay. we also do away with the program

-- is that a waste of time, doing away with this program? a special inspector general for tarp, a special congressional oversight panel, the government accounting office? many of those employees, your constituents in maryland. even the editorial writers of "the new york times" said it does more harm than good. is a wasteful program. even by -- my democratic colleagues on the financial services committee said it is not worked -- it does not work. let's shut it down. $2.8 billion. is that a waste of our time today? third, this legislation saves over $5 billion. is that inconsequential? is that theater?

because it gives real accountability to a government agency that right now has none. the cfpb. they have unlimited funds. then it takes $4.9 billion in savings from just making reforms. this congress, this house voted by over 400 members to do them. even though this will save $4.9 billion, they had not even taken the bill up. 414 of us voted for this bill and the senate has not taken it up. i guess i should not be surprised -- as the budget chairman said, they have not passed a budget for three years. my gosh. this quit talking about group of americans or that group of americans. let's talk about america as if

it is one country. let's not engage in class warfare. let's not pit one income group or one group against each other. we're going to take a very small step today, but it is a first step and it is not an unimportant step toward cutting the national debt. the national debt in the last four years has gone up 70%. that is a staggering amount. let me say this -- particularly the last four years, chairman of bernanke has come before our committee and said that the national debt is in peril in the -- imperiling our national future. he says our economic security is at risk if we do not cut down

the debt. secretary bob gates said it is in the international security. is that theater? is the national debt and illusion? americans do not think so. today we will start acting. we will start acting and we will do something else -- we will cut taxes. we will defer the tax cut. except for the millionaires, those making over $1 million. we will let those tax rates go back up, which is exactly what nancy pelosi proposed. we will take her proposal. and mr. van hollen says it will not give one a democratic road or something -- for something your leader proposed three months ago. that as political theater, mr. van hollen. >> thank you, mr. speaker. i wish the outgoing chairman of

financial services well. this policy did not make the tax proposal that would -- nancy pelosi did not have a tax proposal that would give people earning over $1 million in tax break. no. 2, the proposal the president has put on the table has trillions of dollars of cuts, which is more than in the cuts on the table and would deal with the sequestered. the republican proposal will increase the likelihood taxpayers have to pay -- bailout the financial industry again. they strip away the independence of the consumer finance protection board so that lobbyists can meddle in exactly how they do their work so that they are looking out for the interests of lobbyists rather than the interests of the american people. this approach we're seeing here is another example of trying to help the folks at the very top

at the expense of the rest of the country. it was not me who made the 40's -- 47%, and talking about dividing america. that was made by the republican candidate for president. with that, i yield a minute and a half to the distinguished lady from new york. >> the gentlelady from new york. >> i congratulate you on the wisdom you have generously shared with all of us. mr. speaker, i rise in strong opposition to the bill. instead of putting forth a serious, comprehensive, and balanced deficit-reduction plan, the republicans are taking a timeout so the house can embark upon yet another portion of the ryan budget. the same budget that would end medicare as we know it, walk away from the caps on discretionary spending agreed in the budget control act, and has no chance of being signed into law.

our constituents want us to negotiate for a solution to avoid economic catastrophe. i have concerns with some of the proposals the president has made in his negotiations with the speaker, but at least the president was seeking a workable compromise. instead, the majority walks away from the negotiating table, away from a $3.40 trillion deficit reduction package. given everything a country has been through, from a superstar and sandy to the tragedy in newtown, the last thing americans need is for politicians to refuse to compromise, putting the brakes on economic growth and job creation. i urge my colleagues to end the political charade. let's get back to the serious task of negotiating a balanced deficit-reduction plan. let's do it now, today, we can

do it. >> the gentleman from wisconsin. >> mr. speaker, i want to add my congratulations to the gentlewoman from new york and become the ranking member of the appropriations committee. she has our respect and congratulations. i would like to yield one minute to the distinguished majority leader. >> i thank the gentleman from wisconsin, chairman of the budget committee. mr. speaker, i rise today to urge support for the measures before us to replace the sequester and reduce the deficit and extend permanent tax relief to the middle-class and hundreds of thousands of small business people. for the past weeks and months, as people have been looking for jobs and budgeting for their expenses, we have been working to keep taxes from going up and offering common sense spending reforms. the spending reduction act at issue today reduces our deficit and protect our national

security by replacing indiscriminate cuts that are neither strategic nor balanced. mr. speaker, we all agree that our current spending path is unsustainable and poses a real threat to the economy, to job creation, and to our ability to remain competitive in a global economy. we must address the underlying issues that face this country, which is the mounting deficit and the load of debt that we are going to leave to this generation and the next. but the president has been unwilling to consider serious spending cuts. or offer a serious and balance plan to avoid the fiscal cliff. the risk of unchecked spending -- the consequences of our debt crisis will be felt by every student looking for a job that matches their skills after graduation, by every retiree counting on social security and

medicare, and every small- business owner looking to expand and hire. we have passed bills and put forward reforms that would save programs like social security, medicare, and medicaid from certain and predictable failure. what yet we cannot find cooperation from the white house or the other side of the aisle to help solve these problems. it is unfortunate that we find ourselves in this place, just 11 days from the new year. for months, we have been ready and willing to work with the president to prevent the fiscal cliff from impacting small businesses and hard-working families. the math shows that the president's bush to hike taxes will not reduce the deficit. left unchecked, the spending will bankrupt our future. our plan will protect 740,000 additional small businesses that would otherwise be hit by the

tax hike the president is proposing. we do not believe taxes should go up on anybody. but if we can prevent taxes from going up on as many people as possible, on a 99.8% of american families and small businesses. we must then need to do so. americans are looking for jobs. small businesses are deciding whether they should hire or invest. many americans are struggling to make ends meet. we're all committed to creating an economy where everyone has an opportunity to succeed. house republicans are offering a plan today similar to the one that received 53 democratic votes in the u.s. senate only two years ago. the spending reduction act is a serious start to reducing our deficit and protecting our national security.

absent a balanced offer from the president, this is our nation's best option. senate democrats should take up both these measures immediately. the president has a choice, mr. speaker. he can support these measures or the responsible for reckless spending and the largest tax hike in american history. i yield back. >> the gentleman from maryland. >> thank you, mr. speaker. what is on balance is the republican package that we see on the floor today. we already talked about the numbers of the republican plan b tax proposal, which compared to going over the fiscal cliff and the senate alternative would actually provide millionaires with a $50,000 tax cut on average while 25 million

american families will actually see a tax increase of $1,000 on average, including, mr. speaker, some of our soldiers on the front lines in afghanistan today. the majority leader talked about doing the math -- do the math and the tax plan. that is exactly what it shows. the president has called for a balanced plan that asks for the wealthiest to share the burden of our deficit challenge and make sure that we get our economy in full gear. with that, i yield a minute and a half to the distinguished ranking member of the ways committee, mr. levin. >> the gentleman from michigan. >> i did not know i would follow the distinguished majority leader. i just want to say -- for him or

anybody else to come on the floor and say the president has not proposed spending cuts is not true, and undercut the necessary level of trust to find common ground. that kind of a statement should not be made. i sat in the rules committee for three hours last night. there was no reference to planned c. it came up just a few minutes before midnight. the purpose of plan c is to try to get votes for plan b in the republican caucus. what it does is to undermine the affordable care act by eliminating protections. the joint task committee says it would result in the loss of

health insurance coverage for 420,000 people. it would repeal the block grant social services for millions of americans. it was not many years ago when chairman camp said this has been a key source of funding, flexible funding for critical social services. so now, in a desperate effort to find votes for plan b, you turn your back on that. finally, it would require millions of low-income families and their kids -- the estimate is it would affect 1 million families and more than 3 million kids. searching for votes for plan b with that kind of approach, i think, is abominable.

i yield back. >> the gentleman from wisconsin. >> the gentleman reserves. >> the gentleman from maryland. >> i inquire how much time remains. >> you have 17 and a half minutes -- mr. ryan has 19 and a half minutes. -- 15 and a half. >> i will yield a minute and a half to the gentleman from new jersey, mr. andrews. >> without objection. >> mr. speaker, the republican majority needs to do what americans do everyday in the labor negotiations and real estate offices and other places around the country. that is to negotiate rather than simply restate their position. the president asks for higher tax rates on income above $250,000 and compromises and moves it up to $400,000.

the president started with a spending cut number that was $500 billion and move it up to $1.20 trillion. included in that, a very controversial proposal dealing with social security increases. the president has compromised. the republicans, once again, are simply regurgitating their same old position. a tax provision that has a $50,000 a year tax cut for millionaires and a tax increase for 25 million working families, including service members and their children. a proposal that cuts jobs on transportation projects, day care centers, nursing homes, across the country. we should stop wasting our time on one-sided bills, follow the president's lead, lift our sights higher, and negotiate. that is the way out of this conundrum. i would urge my friends on the

majority side to stop pontificating and start negotiating. i yield back. >> the gentleman from wisconsin. >> i yield myself 30 seconds -- follow the president's lead? i wish he were leading. the gentleman from michigan said he offered specifics -- i wish it were so. where are they? where are the numbers? we hear platitudes -- we see budget gimmicks and accounting tricks, but we do not see specifics. we have yet to see a specific solution from this president to deal with the debt crisis. he has claimed he wants to cut $300 -- $3 of spending for everyone borut tax increases. we have seen a lot of specific tax increases, but we have not seen a specific spending cut proposal from the president. that is the problem. with that, i would like to yield three minutes to the gentleman from oklahoma. >> the gentleman from oklahoma. >> thank you, mr. speaker.

i rise in support of this legislation. it is no secret we're facing a severe debt crisis right now. with the 16 trillion dollar mark piled up, if we do not act quickly we will pass along a crushing burden to our children and grandchildren. reducing government spending is never an easy task. we face difficult choices. house republicans have lived up to our responsibilities to find ways to cut our costs so that we can once again live in our means. the agricultural committee did its part by mining $33 billion in savings over 10 years. we did this by making credible, common-sense reforms to the supplemental assistance program, food stamps, if you want to call at that. these provisions reduce waste and abuse and close loopholes. i would like to make it absolutely clear that none of

these recommendations will prevent families that qualify for assistance under snap from receiving those benefits. think about that -- all they have to do is demonstrate their income level, demonstrate their asset level, fill out the paperwork, qualify, and they will receive the benefit. we are working hard to better target the program and improve its integrity so families in need can continue to receive nutrition assistance. everyone of these provisions represents common sense and good government in times of fiscal restraint. i would also like to note, policies included in this bill are not the only changes that the house agriculture committee has passed that would reduce -- caused as a reduction. the committee passed a comprehensive reform bill by a strong bipartisan vote. a majority of republicans and democrats. the bill will save $35 billion in the agricultural base line.

our bill makes reforms to commodity programs, conservation programs, as well as significant reforms to the food stamp program. my committee is doing everything it can to provide a variety of options for all parties to consider. we have made workable reforms to all programs in our jurisdiction, saving taxpayers billions of dollars. we want to be part of the solution. we have proven time and time again we are willing to do our part. again, i urge my colleagues to adopt these reforms. yes, it means you have to apply. yes, it means you have to demonstrate your assets and your income. but if you are qualified, you will receive the help guinea. you just have to -- the help you need. you just have to demonstrate. is that unreasonable? with a 16 trillion dollar deficit -- is that unreasonable? with a $1 trillion annual

spending deficit? demonstrate the need the help and we will help you. that is not unreasonable. i yield back the balance of my time. >> the gentleman from maryland. >> thank you, mr. speaker. a couple of points. first, the chairman of the budget committee said the president had not been any specific spending cuts on the table. that is just not true. his proposal has been available to the public for well over a year now. one specific proposal -- the president has said we should get rid of excess of agriculture subsidies. he has called for $30 billion on that item alone. interestingly, this proposal -- >> will the gentleman yield? i meant net. >> that also is not true. we will have a longer discussion. the reality is, ag subsidies 18 -- is one concrete example.

this cuts deeply in the food nutrition program, but does not take one penny from subsidies for agro businesses. it is important to correct another important statement made by the chairman of the budget committee and the ag committee with respect to the food program. i and the chairman knows that the snap statute provides in its statutes ways for people to be eligible for food and nutrition assistance. one is the specific income and asset test, or they can become eligible under the snap statue based on participation in other programs where they have to show in, need. nobody wants fraud. we should find every dollar of wasted money and get rid of it. but do not pretend that people who under the statute qualify, that they are engaged in fraud. what you are proposing to do in this republican bill is to deny

millions of those people their legal support for folks on nutrition programs, and we do not think we should be doing that at the same time we are giving millionaires a $50,000 average tax cut. with that i yield a minute and a half to the gentleman from new jersey. >> thank you, mr. speaker. i thank my colleague from maryland. mr. speaker, republicans are once again trying to undermine the recovery of the american middle-class. house republicans have rejected a balanced approach to addressing our deficit and instead opted for draconian cuts to the people who can afford them the least in an effort to protect the wealthy. the republican plan may as well be called the reverse robin hood agenda, where they take from the port to get from the rich. it starts by literally taking food out of the mouths of children by cutting the critical supplemental nutrition assistance program. next, they move onto one of their favorite pastimes, trying to repeal the affordable care act. specifically the provisions that

help make health care more affordable for women, children, seniors, and the poor. 300,000 low income children will lose access to half their thanks to cost to medicaid and the children's health insurance program. women will lose access to critical health services like cancer screenings and immunizations. finally, the last step is to go after another favorite target -- that a social security. house republicans have only one constituency to protect -- that is the wealthiest americans. it could not be more obvious. i yield back the balance of my time. >> the gentleman from wisconsin. >> i would like to yield three minutes to the chairman of the commerce committee, mr. upton. >> the gentleman from michigan. >> thank you, mr. speaker. today we take a stand as we work together to get our $16 trillion national debt under control and put us on a path toward a more sound fiscal future. a spending reduction act of 2012

-- we identify key areas to sensibly reduce spending in the effort to reduce -- replace the blunt instrument known as the sequestered. without this balanced package of savings, in two weeks the sequester is going to cut discretionary spending indiscriminately while shielding the lion's share of the government's budget reductions. critical priority such as th important cancer research and fda review and inspection but it's to keep foods and medicines safe -- they are on the chopping block because we've dealt to engage in a substantive discussion on reforming entitlement programs that threaten to derail the long-term solvency of the u.s. i'm proud of the work of our committee. we identified over $100 billion in savings over the next decade and accomplished in a sensible and responsible manner. we said enough is enough to the litany of a slush funds tucked into obamacare. funds were discovered through

aggressive oversight -- blank checks given to hhs that will cost taxpayers billions of dollars. with a common-sense changes to medicaid that will put important programs on firmer ground. among other reforms, we will eliminate the maintenance of effort requirement. this meant it impedes the ability to implement program integrity measures and actually weakens the safety net by making it more difficult for states to target resources for the most honorable americans. we achieve significant savings and something that was notably absent in the health-care law. that being reform -- he declared in his 2011 state of being in that he is willing to look at other ideas to bring down costs, including one that republicans suggested, medical malpractice reform to rein in frivolous lawsuits. after two years of empty promises, now is the time for the president to fulfill that pledge and finally put doctors,

patients, and taxpayers first. that is in this bill. the house passed a budget, and now legislation again that really cut spending to offset the automatic spending cuts or sequester. our debt rose by nearly $4 trillion -- $4 billion a day, and it is our kids and their grandkids who will pay the price of the stand by and do nothing. without action, a 24 trillion debt will soon be reality. it is not us -- a $20 trillion in debt will soon be a reality. if not now, when is it going to happen? our work is that easy, but it is necessary. it is time to make tough choices to get the deficit down. let's vote for the bill. i yield back my time. >> the gentleman from maryland. >> thank you, mr. speaker. and now yield a minute and a half to the gentle lady from california, ms. waters, and congratulate her on being

granted member -- ranking member of the financial services committee. >> it is clear the republican majority's bill is an attempt to generate votes for speaker boehner's plan b. when it comes to protecting the american middle-class from another taxpayer bailout, the bill gets a failing grade. first, the plan reveals -- repeals the existing authority treated in dodd-frank to end the era of too big to fail institutions. the bill would also tie the hands of the consumer financial protection bureau, an agency formed under dodd-frank to make sure financial institutions play by the rules when it comes to market and student loans and credit cards and pay lenders. the bill would eliminate that funding and instead tied their hands by making their bureau basically have to go through the

appropriations process. the plan likewise eliminates the office of financial research, an agency that is tasked with collecting information on the health of our financial markets and conducting research on financial stability issues. finally, the bill would kill the affordable modification program. we need to improve our ability to do the modifications, not kill it. it is unfortunate that at the end of another session of congress the republicans are again playing with the u.s. economy when they should be working in a bipartisan manner with the house democrats to avert the fiscal cliff. ladies and gentlemen, i know many of you did not know all this was in the bill, but we have an orderly way of dissolving these financial institutions that put our economy at risk. a vote no on this. >> the gentleman from wisconsin. >the gentleman reserves.

the gentleman from maryland. >> i inquire how much time -- >> the gentleman from maryland has 11 and a half minutes. the gentleman from wisconsin has nine. >> mr. speaker, i will just say a few words again about the priority is reflected in this republican package. if you look at plan b, the tax part, you are giving people who earn more than $1 million a year on average a $50,000 tax that compared to what it would be on the senate proposal. at the same time, under this proposal we are talking about here on the floor of the house, you are talking about eliminating important support for food and nutrition programs for millions of americans, including 300,000 kids who would no longer be on a school lunch programs.

what this boils down to, once again, mr. speaker, is a question of priorities. we have got to reduce our deficit and get the economy moving again, but we have to deal with the deficit in a balanced way, not in a way that provides additional tax benefits to the wealthiest americans at the expense of the rest of the country. >> the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from wisconsin. >> i'll give myself one minute. the food stamp program has grown over the last years by 270%. that as far in excess of the recession. with these kinds of reforms, it will have run by 260%. hardly the kind of draconian cuts the gentleman seems to suggest. what we're saying with these programs is you need to be eligible for the actual benefit to receive the benefit. that is not asking too much. if we cannot put common sense reforms like this in place, we will never get anywhere in

dealing with this debt crisis. the gentle lady from the financial services committee says it is wrong to submit the consumer financial protection bureau to the appropriations process. i find that an amazing critique. i yield myself another 30 seconds -- this is an agency that gets its money from the federal reserve without ever having to go through congress. when we uphold the constitution and take office, let us never forget that the power first lies in the legislative branch. all the executive agencies sort of have to go through the appropriations process. that is not getting a program, that is bringing accountability to a program. with that, i would like to yield three minutes to the gentleman from georgia. >> mr. speaker, i rise in support of the underlying bill,

the spending reduction act of 2012. as chairman ryan said, we are not only facing a fiscal cliff, but as he put it, we are facing a fiscal abyss. indeed, a fiscal grand canyon. i want to address my remarks to title 5 of -- title 4, excuse me, of the bill, which was just referenced by the chairman of the commerce committee, the gentleman from michigan. that is the accessible, low- cost, health care act of 2012. to implement reasonable, comprehensive, and effective health-care liability reform. indeed, exactly what the president has been calling for the last five years, even in the first election when he was campaigning and speaking for the american medical association in chicago. as a physician for over 30 years, i fully understand the importance of finding balance in

medical liability by keeping doctors and hospitals accountable for their actions while limiting the frivolous lawsuits that contribute to inflated health care costs and rising insurance premiums. we need to reform the system so that patients who have been wrong received a desert settlement and at the same time protect nation's physicians who work hard every day to ensure that their patients receive quality care. therefore, i once again introduced the health act in this 112th congress to ensure that those who have valid liability claims are supported and at the same time discouraging the practice of crackpot justice. if enacted, this title would make health care delivery more accessible and cost-effective in the united states by limiting the amount of plaintiffs -- patient awards that are available for plaintiff attorney

fees. among other things, the legislation would ensure that all settlements against medical providers are proportional to their responsibility for the patient's injury. mr. speaker, the nonpartisan congressional budget office has stated that if the health act were enacted, the federal government alone would save $40 billion over the next 10 years. other studies have shown the savings to be much higher, some as high as $200 billion annually. over all health care, which indeed, constitutes nearly one s/5 of our entire economy. -- one-fifth of our entire economy. this will also help with one of the largest drivers in health care -- they are forced to order excessive tests simply to avoid not practice suits. health care costs go up and patient safety goes down.

if the gentleman will yield an additional 30 seconds? i thank the gentleman. i wholeheartedly believe that the act takes an important step to improve health care delivery in this country. this is a topic of common sense, market-based reform that the health-care system requires. mr. speaker, i fully ihr 6684, and more specifically the immense benefits that the health act will not only have on the federal budget but on the health of our nation. with that, i yield back. >> the gentleman from maryland. >> thank you, mr. speaker. let's talk a little bit about what this republican package will and will not do with respect to health issues. first of all, while the bill would replace much of the sequester, they leave in place the 2% across the board medicare. let me say that again -- despite

all the talk we're hearing today on the floor about their efforts to replace these across-the- board cuts, they leave them in place for medicare, which will hit providers and have an impact on the medicare system. second, with respect to children's health, they cut about $20 billion from medicaid and the children's health program over the next 10 years. even though those programs are protected from the sequestered. so if we were to go over the fiscal cliff, which apparently is the way republican colleagues want to take us right now, we're not talking with the president but are here on the floor. if we go over the fiscal cliff, those children softer is protected. but if we adopted a republican proposal, those children would actually see last health security. in fact, according to the

congressional budget office, in 2015 there will be 300,000 children who no longer have coverage under the children's health insurance program. that is what they are proposing here, even as the tax plan provides millionairess with an average tax break of $50,000 compared to the senate plan. even though their tax plan, while providing millionaires that average rate compared to the senate plan, is going to increase the tax burden on 25 million families. >> the average tax cut for millionaires compared to the senate plan, and at the same time, the sequester proposal that would result in 300,000 kids in the year 2015 losing their children health insurance coverage, according to the cdo. there you have to, mr. speaker,

the priorities of the republican plan. that is not balance. the reason we are here is because our republican colleagues refuse to compromise. they bring this bill in the floor in the name of a productive contribution to compromise when this virtually identical bill does not get a single democratic vote last spring. not one. that is compromise? the senate has already said it will not take up the bill. the president has said he will veto it. we are wasting the people's time, mr. speaker. it is time for the speaker of this house to negotiate with the president. we know what the problem is. there is this book that is very aptly titled. "it is even worse that looks at." book was written by two scholars

of the congress. -- "it is even worse than it looks." this book was written by two scholars of the congress. they say that house republicans have become insurgent out lyres, ideologically extreme, and contemptuous of the current social regime, and scornful of compromise. that is from two nonpartisan, independent scholars. that is exactly the problem we've got here today. this time for the speaker to actually follow the good counsel of many members of his caucus. either take up the senate bill and pass it, or let's get serious and negotiate with president who has put forward a balanced plan, a plan that a lot of democrats do not like. in fact, there will be democrats

who do not vote for even the proposals that the president has put forward already. many are still reserving judgment. that is the test of compromise, not a bill that comes to the floor that has never had a single democratic vote. that is not compromise. the american people want us to work together and stop playing this political games. let's not bring to the floor of the house bills that have never done a democratic vote before, and which the president has already indicated that he will veto because they failed the important test of balance. i reserve the balance of my time. >> the gentleman from wisconsin? >> mr. chairman, i will yield it over to mr. eisa from california. two minutes -- before i do, let me just say, over the past decade, medicaid spending increased by over 150%.

over the next decade, is projected to increase over 225%. in an effort to slow the increase, that is called a cut? that is our problem. >> thank you, mr. chairman, mr. speaker. shame on this body. we have a $10 trillion whole in the difference between our spending and our revenue. we cannot find a way to compromise? the gentleman from maryland said that it did not receive a single democratic vote. this is the most humble and minimal proposal i could imagine. the chairman of the budget committee himself would recognize that we're not getting close to balanced budget by this. this is a down payment. my committee marked up one of the largest portions of these improvements which aligns the federal workforce as ompensation -- workforce's

compensation to with the rest of hard-working americans. yet we cannot get a single democratic vote. i say to the democrats, shame on you for not making a down payment on a $10 trillion shortfall. to my colleagues on the republican side, this is not enough, not nearly enough, but at least we're showing that we do not a partner in the white house or in this body that will work with us to begin a down payment on a $10 trillion worth of shortfall. in closing, even if the president got his original wish that we were going to go over the cliff and raise five under $38 billion in new revenue, we would still have $500 billion of excess spending that was built up when bill clinton left office. i hope the american people are watching. i hope they will demand that we do more than a small down payment. we need to address $10 drilling

over 10 years. $1 trillion per year, and we're not even beginning to do that. i hope this will pass because we need the democrats to realize that this is only the beginning of what will be a much tougher effort on behalf of the american people. i yield back. >> the gentleman from maryland? >> thank you, mr. speaker. well it is true that our republican colleagues will not a partner for a totally lopsided, on balanced approach that once again -- unbalanced approach that once again minimizes the responsibility of the wealthiest in this country at the expense of everybody else. i yield my time to the ranking member from massachusetts, on the financial services committee, mr. frank. >> the previous speaker

complained about not being to make cuts. that is after the house is ready to vote on a bill in which members are talking about weapons systems the pentagon does not even want and bragging about it. what troubles me most is the attack on the consumer financial protection bureau. i know my republican colleagues hated the idea of an independent bureau -- we created an independent one. they did not have the votes to stop it. but not the willingness to take it on. there is a provision in this bill that would take away the powers of the consumer bureau. it is apparently not a map -- a matter of principle for financial regulatory institutions that banker like -- anchors like. -- bankers like.

all the consumer bureau -- the consumer bureau, that is dangerous, they are giving people refunds on credit cards, but a reserved? they can stay autonomous. the federal deposit insurance corporation -- the strong proposal -- a principle that my republicans -- my republican colleagues support, it is not real. they would also abolish financial research. there is a wide consensus that we had a problem in the first part of the century and we did not know what was happening. the republicans want to vote for continued ignorance. >> the gentleman from wisconsin. he >> -- >> the gentleman from maryland has 3 1/2 minutes. >> i will reserve the balance. >> senator from maryland -- compaq representative from

maryland -- representative from maryland. >> let me thank a disservice -- the service of the speaker given to the congress. one speaker on the other side said, shame on the congress. i just wanted to join with him on that. i also want history to record that they may ask, what the heck was rangel doing when this was going on? i hope the record is abundantly clear that this was outlined in the campaign. it was the presidential campaign. the president said that as a result of america getting into wars, as a result of wrongdoing on wall street, and as a result of a lot of people out of work that we had to have a program to raise the money to pay down the deficit by cutting back programs. it seems as though what is --

what has happened here is that the republican party missed something. maybe it was election night. maybe it was a small group of the republican party. they did not really believe that the president won. this whole idea of protecting 2% of the population actually was on a vote. the people voted. the president said he was going to protect 98% of the taxpayers. somehow, this is not being understood. further from that, if you have to have more savings, and i agree that we do, why would you go, of all places, to the most vulnerable? my friend from wisconsin often tells me how fast food stamps have risen. i wonder a bill he has ever taken the time to realize that there is a relationship between the increase in unemployment and

the increase in food stamps. i want that to be recorded, mr. speaker. >> the gentleman's time has expired. the chairman still reserves to close. the gentleman from maryland has to, nats. >> i -- i yield a minute and a half to the distinguished member from california. >> mr. speaker, my colleagues, we have seen this business over and over again from the republicans. plan b, plan c, let's work on a bipartisan agreement to avoid the fiscal cliff. what they presented to us today would slash medicaid, that will hurt hundreds of thousands of people, including but not 300,000 children from health insurance, hurting some of our most vulnerable citizens. it would impede implementation of the health reform law, already benefiting millions of americans.

it fails to protect medicare from billions of dollars of cuts under sequestration. it establishes a federal malpractice system -- medical malpractice system, trampling on the rights of states. it undermines our future by cutting public health investments. this is so unacceptable. we have nothing to solve the looming payment cuts. this is exactly the same republican proposals that were rejected by the american people. they do not want more tax breaks for the billionaires' and millionaires and big corporations, paid for by cuts in our poorest americans -- paid for by cuts to our poorest americans. >> a minute to close off for the gentleman from maryland. >> thank you, mr. speaker. i yield the final minute to the gentleman from pennsylvania. >> i want to dump the gentleman for yielding. i know a lot of people may be

confused by this debate. in every instance, a is the preferable option. where you get your christmas tree, if you are going to happen, when somebody suggest to you option b, it is something less than the best. we have at the very best country in the face of the earth, with the wealthiest, strongest and most powerful nation in the world, and what they are asking us to do is to choose rather than a grand bargain, they want us to go with plan b. as a whole, the house will reject plenty -- that is something less than our nation deserves, not worthy of this house, not even worthy of the majority, because they know it is not going anywhere. we know it is not going anywhere. if we want to move our country forward, which is what the american people voted for, we need to choose option 8, rather

than plan b. plan b is not the way to go. if we want to stay in the lead, we need to get our fiscal house in order. reject this plan be. >> the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from wisconsin has to come minutes remaining. -- two minutes remaining. >> let's take a step back and remind us or we are. on january 1, if we do nothing, every american taxpayer will see a massive tax increase. that will dramatically hurt our economy and families. the next day, we will face a 10% cut in our defense budget. americans chose divided government, whether it was intended or not. the president won, a house still a republican house. we will have to find a way to make this work. this is what we are attempting to do today.

we want to avert this crisis, this cliff, but that means that we need to get spending under control. that means preventing as many tax increases as possible. my friend from maryland, and i mean this sincerely, says we need a balanced approach. the president in all his latest proposals says more taxes and even more and that spending, hardly a balanced approach. here is the problem. our problem is not balanced. while taxes are going up, even if all the current tax rates are extended, taxes still go up. the problem is, spending goes way up. spending is our problem. the size of our government will double. the president has shown the leadership on dealing with the

drivers of our debt. we have passed our budgets. we have put specifics out there. let's avert a fiscal cliff, and let's get down to the business of preventing the fiscal abyss, which is the coming debt crisis that will not be resolved until we have a real leadership, and that unfortunately is sorely lacking. with that, i urge passage of this. let's prevent taxpayers from the tax increases. what's the down payment on spending cuts. let's pass this bill. >> all time for debate has expired. the previous question is ordered on the bill. those in favor, say aye. those opposed, say no. but the bill to provide for spending reductions -- >> is the gentleman opposed? >> i am opposed.

>> mr. van hollen moves to recommit this bill to the committee on ways and means with instructions to report the same back to the house -- to the house with the following amendment -- at the end -- add to the end of the bill, disclosure of higher beneficiary costs and provider cuts under medicare, medicaid, and chip cuts. disclosure of higher beneficiary costs under medicare and medicaid and checkouts. not later than 30 days on the enactment of this act, the secretary of health and human services will publish on the public internet web site on the department of health and human services the information described in this section with regard to each congressional district in the united states, including the district of colombia, and each of the territories of the united states.

required information -- the information required in this subscript -- subsection is the number of medicare beneficiaries, the number of medicaid beneficiaries, and the number of children and health insurance program beneficiaries in such a district. at any time in the ten-year. -- ten-year period, any person that lose coverage under this program, under a state plan or waiver, under the medicaid program -- or under a state child health plan, under title 21, and as a result of the implementation of this act, experience an increase in premiums, cost sharing, or other

out-of-pocket costs under such programs as a result of the implementation of this act, and to go, the name and location of each hospital and nursing facility that would experience a reduction in payments under the medicare program, a state plan or waiver under the medicaid program, or a state plan under the children health insurance program as a result of the implementation of this act. title mind -- nine -- and taxpayers subsidies for big oil. the reduction of income but to tell -- attributable to domestic production of such activities. sub paragraph b -- so paragraph -- subparagraph a is so refined.

effective date -- the amendment made shall apply to taxable years beginning after december 31, 2012. prohibition on using last and first out accounting for major integrated oil companies. section -- a section of the internal revenue code is amended and. -- is amended. major integrated oil company has defined in the prior section may not be used the method provider -- provided earlier and -- in the inventory of any goods. effective date and special rule -- the amendment made shall apply to taxable years beginning

after december 31, 2012. a change in the method of such a change i shall be treated as initiated by the taxpayer. such a change shall be treated as made with the consent of the secretary of the treasury. what's the reading of the motion -- gentleman from maryland is recognized for five minutes in supporting this motion. >> thank you, mr. speaker. the chairman of the budget committee began his closing remarks by saying, let's take a step back. unfortunately, that is exactly what this package of bills does for the country. it takes as many steps back. the reason it takes us back is

because the speaker of this house is back -- has backed out of negotiations with the president for a balanced approach to dealing with our deficit and making sure that we accelerate economic growth and job creation in this country. the issue has never been whether or not to reduce our long-term deficit. the question has always been, how? how you do it reflects your priorities. the president has made clear, his priority is not to give higher income individuals another tax break relativity to what would happen we went over the fiscal cliff. that is exactly what this package of proposals would do. i have used this chart a couple times. i will use it again. with good reason -- nobody has or can dispute the facts in this chart. the reality is, while folks who

earn more than $1 million a year, about 402 families in this country, and god bless them, we want people to keep making more money, the issue here is shared responsibility. under the republican plan relative to the senate bill, the will get a $50,000 average tax break, while over 25 million americans will see an increase in their tax obligation compared to where we are today. we do not think that is balanced. that is not even balance within their tax plan. at the same time, they bring to the floor today a bill, a sequestration bill, that by the way leaves in place the cuts to medicare, and then cuts support for kids on food stamps and children under the health insurance bill? these are groups that would be protected if went over the

fiscal cliff under current law. mr. speaker, this is a question of priorities. what this motion to recommit does is say, you know what? we think it is time to end the text. giveaways and subsidies to the big oil companies. my goodness, why should all of us be providing them one more round of tax breaks, when gas prices are high, their profits are going through the roof -- taxpayers should not be subsidizing that. we certainly should not be subsidizing that when we have before us a bill that removes about 300,000 kids from the school lunch program and removes about 300,000 kids from the children health insurance program in the year 2015, according to the congressional budget office. this is about priorities. what this very simple motion to recommit does, in addition to asking the oil companies to no

longer keep getting taxpayer subsidies, is to disclose to the public what the impact of these cuts will be on citizens across this country. it says, tell us what the impact of the medicare and medicaid and children health insurance programs cuts will be on kids and others in our districts. at the very least, we should know what we're doing. the cbo has told us -- this is simple accountability. this is understanding what the impact of your vote will be, and so i would hope that our colleagues would recognize that at this time, when oil companies are doing just gray, they do not -- great, i do not need welfare from the u.s. government.

we should also understand very clearly what the impact of these cuts will be, because the projections by the nonpartisan congressional budget office are that it is going to have a very serious negative impact on kids health, as well as in terms of the support of the preventative health fund, for women around the country. with the $10 billion cut to the prevention fund, 326,000 women would not get breast cancer screening. 284,000 women will not receive cervical cancer screenings there were slated to receive in 2013. these cuts have real impact. the question is not whether to make cuts. we have to make cuts. the president has put forward $1.20 trillion in cuts forward, on top of the $1 trillion. we are asking for balance and common sense in our priorities. i urge people to support the motion to recommit.

>> the gentleman from wisconsin 6 recognition. -- seeks recognition. >> i enjoy this. good reading -- rich with irony. title 8, disclosure of medicare, medicaid, and chip cuts -- where was this need for disclosure and the beneficiaries of medicare when they took $716 billion from medicare to spend on obamacare? where was this a concern when they raised $1 trillion in taxes to pay for obamacare? where was all this need for disclosure when they were hitting providers and beneficiaries in the medicare to vote for their obamacare program? the gentleman talks about cuts in food stamps and medicaid. food stamps will have grown by

260%. medicaid has grown by 150% over the past decade. it is projected to grow by 225% over the next decade. slowing the growth of spending is not a cut. it is slowing the growth of spending. this is our problem. if wheat lambaste the common- sense ideas -- we lambast the common-sense ideas as draconian cuts, we will never fix this program. the other part, on oil companies, all these taxes, look, i have been a member of the ways and means committee for 12 years. years ago, we put in place a policy that says, we want more manufacturing in america. we want to reward manufacturing jobs.

you manufacture something here in america, you'll pay and effectively lower tax rate than if you make something overseas. the idea would be, more u.s. manufacturing jobs. here is what they do. they say, not if you are in the oil industry. if you are working in the oilfields in north dakota for the shale in pennsylvania, -- or the shale in pennsylvania, we do not want your jobs. if you manufacture oil in america, we are raising your taxes. we will not raise your taxes kagel you manufacture oil overseas, but you create american made energy jobs, this raises your taxes. not only does it raise our taxes and cost american energy jobs, it raises our gas prices. how is that good for consumers and families? it is an anti-american energy job, pro-high gas tax bill calls

for disclosure that they were not willing to disclose when they jammed obamacare 3. -- through. this is not serious. >> with the gentleman yield? -- would the gentleman yield? >> the speaker and house republicans pulled the plan b because they did not have enough votes to pass it. the bill would have raised taxes on people earning more than $1 million a year. state -- state department officials today testified on capitol hill on the tax on the american consulate in benghazi, libya. that is next. the white house has formed a tax force being headed by vice president biden to address gun violence following last week's school shootings. the national rifle association will hold a news conference in

response to the event in newtown, connecticut. we will have live coverage at ten:45 eastern. -- 10:45 eastern. senior state department officials testified about the attack on a u.s. consulate in benghazi, libya. they discussed the security arrangements at the facility. secretary of state hillary clinton is scheduled to testify about the bank of the attack in january. this hearing on this -- about the benghazi attack in january. this hearing is about one hour and 45 minutes.

>> my apologies to everybody for the switch in time, but as everybody knows with the loss of our colleague center in a way -- senator inouye, the course of events yesterday was uncertain, and it has been decided that his remains will be brought here at about 10:00. everybody thought that it would be inappropriate for us to be

simply having but during and to prevent senators from being able to attend. all of us would like to attend that. we will try to pack his into the period of time we have between now and then. in addition, obviously with the switch in time, some colleagues have not gotten here. i do want to share some thoughts about senator lugar and senator webb and senator demint who believe in the committee -- the committee. i think i will wait until some more of our colleagues are here to share those thoughts. i want to thank everybody for joining us this morning. as everybody is aware, secretary clinton is recovering from a serious virus and concussion, and given her condition, it was simply not possible for her to appear here today.

we all wish her a speedy recovery and in her place, we have both deputies from the state department. i want to thank them for coming in on short notice. let me emphasize this to everybody. all of you who know hillary know that she would rather be here today. i know how deeply she feels about the importance of the discussion we're having here today, and i assure you that it is not her choice that she is not here today. she looks forward to appearing before the committee in january. i also want to emphasize that every member of this committee felt the loss of ambassador chris stevens and his team in a very personal way. we knew chris stevens well before he came before us for confirmation. he had been a fellow with

senator lugar and the committee. inouye the depth of his -- hiser, intelligence death was a personal blow to the committee, to the country, and his family. equally tragic was the loss of three courageous men, whom i had never personally met, but whose families i had a chance to greet and hug when the military brought the remains back one last time to anger errors for -- and yours and for a spate -- andrews air force base. glen daugherty was a former navy seal. -- glenn doherty was a former

navy seal. tyrone woods was another seal. sean smith, an air force veteran. we want to say thank you to all of them, to the fallen, and their families. they all gave it to the nation, and we are grateful beyond words for their service and sacrifice. from the very beginning of the benghazi event, every member of this committee has shared with the president and secretary clinton our determination to get all the facts about what happened and why. resubmitted many questions to the state department to be incorporated into this investigation, and we are very pleased that they have been. we -- we have had a number of classified briefings, and yesterday, the committee heard from an pastor john pickering and admiral mike mullen. we heard them deliver a frank

and comprehensive set of findings to the review board. admiral mollen and an pastor pickering are two of american's most distinguished and capable public servant -- servants. -- admiraland mulle -- admiral mullen and ambassador pickering article of americans most distinguished and capable public servants. i want to thank them for them -- for their extraordinary service to our country. the report pulls no punches. it tackles had on many of the questions we have been asking. the report makes 29 recommendations in total, five of which are classified. secretary clinton has embraced

every single one of them. in fact, she has gone above and beyond of the courts recommendations by taking immediate steps to strengthen security at high threat posts and request for congress the authority to reprogram funds to increase diplomatic security spending by $1.3 billion. in a washington where to go -- were too often we see the recommendations of panels ignored or deferred, as they were for a long time and even the 9/11 commission, i think the secretaries swift action underscores how determined she is to apply the lessons of benghazi. clearly, mistakes were made. we learned of those yesterday in stark terms about the mistakes leading up to the attacks. the report makes that very clear. one of the most candid and important observations was the

failure by certain leaders to see the forest through the trees. there were clear warning signs that the security situation in libya had deteriorated. going forward, it is important -- and i think it is important for all of us to think in these terms -- we need to do a better job of ensuring a free and open dialogue among ambassadors, the embassy security personnel, and officials in washington for decisions on funding and staffing levels and security. as we draw lessons, i want to be crystal clear about something else. congress also bears some responsibility. congress has the power of the purse. we use it for any number of things. it is our responsibility. for years, we have asked our state department to operate with increasingly less resources to conduct the central missions. because of the gridlock and

accesses in the senate and congress itself, we have not even been able to pursue the regular order of authorizing legislation. that must change. in the next session of congress, i hope it will. as in any government entity, we know that when a budget is cut and money is fungible, you stretch every dollar. for some time now, overseas resources have been cut or withheld, and important foreign policy objectives have been a start. consider that last year we spent approximately $650 billion on our military. by contrast, the international affairs budget is less than one- tenth of the pentagon's. secretary gates has spoken about this and strongly urged the congress to address that imbalance. we have not yet. admiral blunt -- averell mollen once pointed out, -- admiral

mullen pointed out, the more diplomacy is cut, the more lives are lost. we have to make certain that we are not penny wise and pound foolish when it comes to supporting americans but hold overseas interests. adequately funding foreign- policy initiatives is not spending, but investing in our long-term security, and more often or not, it saves far more expensive expenditures in dollars and lives the conflicts that we fail to see or avoid. we need to invest in america's long-term interest in order to do the job of diplomacy in a dangerous world. this report makes that crystal clear. since 1985, i have had the privilege of making official journeys to one trouble spot or another. i have met a lot of our men and women in the foreign services. we sat and talked about the work

they do and the lives that they lead. they spent years learning the languages of the country so they can be on the front lines of direct diplomacy. foreign policy, outdoors, as my dad used to call. when my father served in berlin, i remember my mother looking at the clock in the evening when he was late coming home from dinner in a city where troops guarded the lines between east and west and the rubble of war was still very fresh. my father knew that what he was doing was worth whatever the risk might have been, and so do the foreign service personnel but we send over the world today -- that we send over the world today. they need to be excess will to the people on the ground. they want those people to see and touch the face of america. it is no understatement that our diplomats are on the frontlines of the world's most dangerous

places. they leave their families behind, they miss holidays, their risk their safety to make the world safety -- safer, and to protect the interests of our country. they do not a joint foreign service to get rich, and sadly, many of them, their names are only learned when a tragedy like benghazi takes place. our diplomats do not wear a uniform, but these were the same oath as the men and women of our armed forces, and their sacrifice is no less important. take note, everybody, as we learned yesterday's, the board's report calls for an investment of $2.3 billion a year over 10 years in order to meet the fundamental charge of protecting our personnel overseas. we owe it to them and to the memory of chris stevens and others who lost their lives to make good on that request. i make that clear here today.

some may ask why we are in benghazi. the reasons are central to everything we want our foreign service to do. they are central to advancing america's values and furthering our security. we are in benghazi because that is where the revolution in libya began, that is where the vanguard of the transition is today, that is where some principal actors in the future of libya come from. we were there to learn and help libyans to deliver on the promise of the revolution. many of our most -- most important contacts in the future of libya are there. we have to be on the ground and reaching out to these people. that is the enterprise of foreign policy today, to help men, women, and children around the world to share in democracy and the values through it to

bring stability to oil regions of the world and reduce the threats to our nation. -- to all regions of the world and reduce the threats to our nation. by taking military action when we did, we liberated libya, which was a country under the yoke of a dictator for over 40 years. i am convinced that we prevented the slaughter of thousands of innocent lives. the tragic events of the last 9/11, 2012, illustrate the magnitude of the challenge ahead, that the thousands of everyday libyans who marched against the militias and praised chris stevens and the united states, their gratitude for our country provides a measure of hope. that demonstration of affection for america and for our envoy who gave his life for those people some up exactly why we must not look inwards and walk away.

finally, let me say that what happened in benghazi it really cannot be seen in isolation. there is a truth about diplomacy in foreign service that needs to be processed through the committee, congress, and -- and country as we think about the benghazi attack. we have a diplomatic corps that risked their lives every day. that things have happened before. that things will happen again - - that things have happened before. bad things will happen again. we do not want to cornyn america off from the world.

our ability to strike a balance between the risks and the mission is important. we have talked about this. we have had hearings about the design of our embassies, the dangers of a becoming -- the dangers of becoming a fortress america, but we also need to send our right -- the right message to the people we are trying to reach. i distinctly remember feeling and seeing the difficulty of this in vietnam. villagers would examine us suspiciously and give us the stair, and unmistakeable stair that raises many more questions than we were ever able to answer. in iraq and afghanistan, i have revisited that stair -- stare. as you pass -- as you pass through villages with humvees and big guns, the look of confusion or alienation from average iraqis or afghans cannot understand why we are going to the streets that way are

unmistakable. every diplomat worth their salt feels this tension and worries about the misimpression our security footprint can create in the minds of the very people we are trying to reach, and then -- on impression that is starkly revealed on their faces when you are supported -- surrounded by donna-toting personnel. -- gn -toting personnel. this is fundamental to the questions raised in benghazi. we need to be in the business of risk-management, not risk avoidance. there are costs. that is no reason to retrench from the world. it is a reason to honor the memory of ambassador stevens and the others who are deeply committed to a strong american role in the world. that is why he was out there. in the ant, colleagues were all

americans first. -- in the end, colleagues, we are all americans first, particularly in the face of this tragedy. we are very creek -- very pleased that the secretaries are here today. we look forward to continuing your work. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i join you in welcome back secretary burns and secretary hines. we send our best wishes to secretary clinton as she recovers from her mishap. the secretary's pace of activity has been extraordinary by any measure. we are grateful for her devoted service to our country and to the courtesy she has shown to our committee throughout her

tenure. our hearing today gives us a chance to review the events at our consulate in benghazi and resulted in the deaths of christopher stevens, shaun smyth, two embassies' security personnel. -- sean smith, and two of our embassy's security personnel. many questions were raised, whether we had enough intelligence ahead of time, and whether there was a breakdown in security protocols. we raise these questions in respect of the memory of christopher stevens. his address to me on the complexities of the events and relationships, the region was invaluable. after he went back to the state, he briefed my staff from current -- from time to time. all of us have read accounts of

chris stevens extraordinary service. he was personally instrumental in advancing u.s. interests in libya. chris was providing the kind of energetic leadership that we need for our embassy teams. he went beyond the walls to meet and converse with soldiers, shopkeepers, and villagers, as well as generals, bureaucrats, and ministers. chris and his team recognized that effective diplomacy in this era carries substantial risks. nevertheless, it is up to the president, state department, and the congress to ensure that our diplomats have enough support in security to do their job as safely as possible. that means giving our men and women in uniform the weapons they need to carry out our missions. that includes a safe place to work. and susan are both outposts of the u.s. government and symbols

of our country -- and the seas are both outposts of the u.s. government -- and sees -- embassies are out -- are both outposts of the u.s. government and symbols of our country. when i became chairman of this committee, one of the first things i did was initiate an inquiry into embassy security. my staff interviewed dozens of security and diplomatic personnel at embassies around the world. i also commissioned a report that was completed in 2006, and that report noted that significant progress had been made by the state department in building to secure embassies in a cost-efficient manner. recommended that the state department develop an integrated and comprehensive plan. in working with former secretary of state paul, we were initially successful in getting extra money.

in my view, funds for this purpose have never caught up with the threats faced by our diplomats in the post-9/11 world. there had been suggestions that cost considerations contributed to the inadequate protection in the -- in benghazi. in preparation for this hearing, the state department announced that it had received $1.4 billion in the 2013 budget for increased security. i am pleased to see this proposal. we must ensure that a strike the right balance between security and the engagement. i would be interested to hear from a palette -- from the panel how the obama administration will apply these funds and how they will affect the pace of new embassy construction and staffing levels. in the end, our embassies are unlikely to be both perfect and

safe ago congress fails to devote additional -- if congress fails to devote additional funding. we should not forget lessons learned in the 1990's when the sharp budget cuts occurred. this funding squeeze resulted in clear deficiencies in our overall diplomatic capabilities that took years to correct. the state department budget remains a popular target for cuts. in recent years, we have avoided the type of funding to decline at the state department experienced in the 1990's. diplomacy is not a luxury. it is essential to american national security, especially in an era of terrorism. we should fund the state

department and -- as a national security agency that it is. a look forward to our discussion. >> senator lugar, thank you very much. i will not ask questions. i will yield my time. i took a little bit longer with the opening. i just want to say a special thank you -- this will be senator lugar's last hearing. i think whether you have served as chairman or ranking member, you have been an extraordinary influence on all of us. i know your initiative is known as the partisanship. i will never forget in the philippines, your efforts on the floor -- you had this amazing ability and sense of purpose in finding common ground and reaching out to people on both sides of the aisle.

every member of the committee has joined in presenting new resolution, and i just want to read, just the introduction. to route his 36 years in the united states senate, richard lugar has served indiana and the united states with grace, distinction, and testing, and will have many more contributions to the nation that he reveres. we want to present this to you. [applause] >> thank you. thank you very much. mr. chairman, i thank you very much. i am very grateful to have this opportunity -- to have had the opportunity to serve with each and everyone of you. thank you for this special privilege. >> finally, we are also going to

be losing jim webb and jim demint. jim came here and did something that very few freshmen can do a getting a major piece of legislation passed, the new gi bill. on the committee, he has been critical to our thinking about the far east. he was the first american to visit burma in 10 years. i am proud to say -- i think i was the one and before that. he changed the policy. he knew we had to lift the sanctions. his contribution to our thinking about the trans-pacific partnership, continued efforts on a vietnam -- on vietnam has been i concur -- has been a significant contribution. we appreciate his service. jim demint -- we have disagreed. one of the great things about jim demint is that you know

where he stands. he has been a terrific advocate for his point of view. we are confident in the new hat he will wear, we will continue to debate and continue to feel his presence. we thank him very much for his service on the committee. we thank both of them. genin, thank you for putting up -- gentlemen, thank you for putting up with our early efforts here. thank you very much for being here today. secretary burns, you will lead off. >> mr. chairman, senator lugar, members of the committee,, for this opportunity. secretary clinton asked me to express how much she regrets not being able to be here today. i want to join new, mr. chairman, on behalf of the secretary and the men and women of the department of state to respect for senator lugar and his many years of service to our

nation. state department at -- state department officials have testified in four congressional hearings, provided 20 briefings, and submitted thousands of pages of documents, including the now full classified report of the accountability review board. secretary clinton has also sent out a letter covering a large range of issues. i would like to highlight a few key points. the tax in benghazi took the lives of four courageous americans, -- the attacks in benghazi, took the lives of a lot of courage as americans. chris stevens embodied the very best of america. even as we grieve for our four -- for our fallen friends, we took action. we took immediate steps to protect our people and posts. we stayed in contact with embassies around the world facing large